Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 3 Aug 2002 18:00:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 3 Aug 2002 18:00:29 -0400 Received: from dell-paw-3.cambridge.redhat.com ([195.224.55.237]:50418 "EHLO passion.cambridge.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 3 Aug 2002 18:00:28 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.4 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 From: David Woodhouse X-Accept-Language: en_GB In-Reply-To: References: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: davidm@hpl.hp.com, Alan Cox , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com Subject: Re: adjust prefetch in free_one_pgd() Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2002 23:03:49 +0100 Message-ID: <24964.1028412229@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 899 Lines: 24 torvalds@transmeta.com said: > I don't think that non-cache-coherency wrt DMA necessarily means that > that is true, though. If you flush all CPU caches to memory before > starting the DMA, and you invalidate the DMA'd memory range _after_ > the DMA finished, a "prefetch" on such an architecture is not a > problem at all. OK -- assuming you actually do flush before the DMA and invalidate afterwards, that works. That's what I was missing; thanks :) That's for a prefetch operation which doesn't mark the cache line dirty/owned. If you have random addresses used with 'write prefetch' operations, that's still going to be a problem. -- dwmw2 - 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/