Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757431Ab0HQQDT (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Aug 2010 12:03:19 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:40848 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750961Ab0HQQDP convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Aug 2010 12:03:15 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20100817144917.GD14091@sgi.com> References: <20100722152220.GA18290@sgi.com> <20100724001449.GA9618@khazad-dum.debian.net> <20100817144917.GD14091@sgi.com> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 09:02:21 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC] - Mapping ACPI tables as CACHED To: Jack Steiner Cc: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh , mingo@elte.hu, tglx@linutronix.de, lenb@kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1812 Lines: 36 On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 7:49 AM, Jack Steiner wrote: > > I'm certainly not suggesting that ALL platforms map ACPI tables as WB. That > would be a disaster. Only platforms where BIOS specifically reports that > that tables are in WB memory should be mapped as MB. Hmm. I actually suspect we _should_ map ACPI tables as WB all the time. I'm not actually seeing any reason why we should ever map them uncacheable, because as far as I can tell there are exactly two realistic situations: - they are in RAM to begin with. I would pretty much expect this to be true 99.9% of the time. Everybody uses compressed BIOS flash images and uncompresses the image into RAM anyway, because (a) bigger flash chips are another 25?, so nobody can afford that on a PC motherboard (b) the flash interface is ridiculously slow anyway, and you don't want to execute your BIOS off it, and (c) the BIOS almost always actually _changes_ the tables depending on various BIOS settings, so mapping the tables as anything but RAM wouldn't work _anyway_. - even if they aren't in RAM, it's likely fine to let the dang things be in the cache. On at least some platforms (old ones), if they aren't in RAM, the system logic will override any MTRR/pageattribute issues anyway. So I think we should just map those things WB by default. Maybe with some way to override it (possibly automatically). It sounds like it's a big enough performance issue even on smaller systems (0.1 seconds is quite a bit of the boot time on some systems). 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/