From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264078AbTDOVPQ (for ); Tue, 15 Apr 2003 17:15:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264080AbTDOVPQ (for ); Tue, 15 Apr 2003 17:15:16 -0400 Received: from pc2-cwma1-4-cust86.swan.cable.ntl.com ([213.105.254.86]:48320 "EHLO lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264078AbTDOVPP (for ); Tue, 15 Apr 2003 17:15:15 -0400 Subject: Re: PATCH: MTRR save and restore. From: Alan Cox To: Patrick Mochel Cc: Pavel Machek , Richard Gooch , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Nigel Cunningham In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Organization: Message-Id: <1050438520.28591.4.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-5) Date: 15 Apr 2003 21:28:41 +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Maw, 2003-04-15 at 21:18, Patrick Mochel wrote: > MTRRs are one interface to an x86 CPU. CPUs are already represented in the > device tree. The proper thing to do would be to have the CPU suspend/ > resume methods save and restore the MTRRs. It still requires an #ifdef in > the CPU code, but with a little work, could be massaged down a ways. Also it has to be done kernel side for SMP because having mismatched MTRRs between processors is unsafe, yet lots of BIOSen get it wrong.