Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 25 Jan 2002 15:56:11 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 25 Jan 2002 15:56:01 -0500 Received: from neon-gw-l3.transmeta.com ([63.209.4.196]:28680 "EHLO neon-gw.transmeta.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 25 Jan 2002 15:55:54 -0500 Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 12:40:48 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds To: Alan Cox cc: Martin Wilck , Linux Kernel mailing list , Richard Gooch , Marcelo Tosatti Subject: Re: [PATCH]: Fix MTRR handling on HT CPUs (improved) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 25 Jan 2002, Alan Cox wrote: > As Dave pointed out I was mixing them > > > just not do it on the right CPU (you're _not_ supposed to read to see if > > you are writing the same value: MTRR's can at least in theory have > > side-effects, so it's not the same check as for the microcode update). > > So why not just set it twice - surely that is harmless ? Why add complex > code ? At the _least_ you have to serialize the thing, which is most of what the patch actually does. Writing the MTRR's in parallel from two different cores at the same time is just obviously bogus, the same way it is obviously bogus to try to update the microcode at the same time. Linus - 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/