From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933120AbYEGWSv (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 May 2008 18:18:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1764536AbYEGWSQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 May 2008 18:18:16 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:52618 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1762898AbYEGWSL (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 May 2008 18:18:11 -0400 Date: Wed, 7 May 2008 15:17:51 -0700 From: Arjan van de Ven To: Rene Herman Cc: Yinghai Lu , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Subject: Re: 2.6.26, PAT and AMD family 6 Message-ID: <20080507151751.7a7484f1@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <4821FE2E.9030606@keyaccess.nl> References: <48210A71.1060409@keyaccess.nl> <86802c440805061939q39ff5500h3c9e229ecbc6b2e6@mail.gmail.com> <4821A7E2.6080101@keyaccess.nl> <20080507064259.36deb978@infradead.org> <4821B801.5030508@keyaccess.nl> <20080507072431.30abefae@infradead.org> <4821FE2E.9030606@keyaccess.nl> Organization: Intel X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.3.1 (GTK+ 2.12.9; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 07 May 2008 21:08:30 +0200 > > > > we filter those for all kinds of things already, sorry. > > What good is showing "pat" if "pat" isn't deemed usable (yet)???? > > Now *that* is deception :) > > The trouble is -- if you hide that the CPU _should_ have PAT, how many > people do you expect are going to look further and test? I knew that I > should have PAT so I distrusted my CPU feature flag display but you've > now limited your testers to people who've read the CPU datasheet. > That's really no good. and... why would we care? there's no upside even if you use pat. pat is nice to avoid problems on newer systems that run out of mtrrs. For older systems, right now, there isn't any. > If Linux messes around with those flags already, it's doing things > wrong already. /proc/cpuinfo is not a display of software features > but of hardware features -- anything else is outright wrong. Being > wrong for PAT also doesn't improve things. that is your interpretation of what that file means. It's... not so easy.