From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 22:26:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 22:26:04 -0400 Received: from pizda.ninka.net ([216.101.162.242]:18563 "EHLO pizda.ninka.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 22:25:46 -0400 Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 19:26:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20010822.192600.35357607.davem@redhat.com> To: kevin.vanmaren@unisys.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: With Daniel Phillips Patch From: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: <245F259ABD41D511A07000D0B71C4CBA289F30@us-slc-exch-3.slc.unisys.com> In-Reply-To: <245F259ABD41D511A07000D0B71C4CBA289F30@us-slc-exch-3.slc.unisys.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 2.0 on Emacs 21.0 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: "Van Maren, Kevin" Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 21:22:19 -0500 If the HW generates DAC for addresses < 4GB whenever enabling support for 64-bit addresses, then that is very broken. That is what happens. Please don't complain that I didn't spend hours searching through the archives looking for a message from months? years? ago that I didn't know existed. Weeks, if not days. > I think for SAC-only devices, it is just dumb wasted space in the > driver image. Perhaps. But the question is whether it is simpler/better to have HIGHMEM x86 kernels (which by definition have memory to spare) waste a few bytes to provide "sane" interfaces across all platforms. And whether the kernel bloat for all the additional functions compensates for it ;-) The plain fact is that %95 of PCI devices do not support DAC addressing. Later, David S. Miller davem@redhat.com