Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 16:36:21 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 16:36:11 -0500 Received: from svr3.applink.net ([206.50.88.3]:45319 "EHLO svr3.applink.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 16:35:59 -0500 Message-Id: <200201242130.g0OLSrL06629@home.ashavan.org.> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Timothy Covell Reply-To: timothy.covell@ashavan.org To: Martin Wilck , Linux Kernel mailing list Subject: Re: [PATCH]: Fix MTRR handling on HT CPUs (improved) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 15:30:22 -0600 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.2] Cc: Richard Gooch , Martin Wilck , Marcelo Tosatti , Linus Torvalds In-Reply-To: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 24 January 2002 14:57, Martin Wilck wrote: > On Intel processors with "Jackson" technology (also HT, HyperThreading), > two logical processors share certain registers, in particular the MTRR > registers. The Linux way of manipulating these registers may lead to > inconsistent MTRR settings or total disabling of cache. I thought that Intel was purposely downplaying HT support on the processors due to performance issues and M$ didn't support it likewise. Is this another case of Linux being out in the front of things? Are you to a point that you can benchmark it and recommend when to enable it or not? -- timothy.covell@ashavan.org. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/