Re: PAT support

[Andy Whitcroft <apw@shadowen.org>]

--On 12 April 2004 17:29 -0500 Terence Ripperda <tripperda@nvidia.com>
wrote:

> quite a while back, I sent out email about adding Page Attribute Table
> support to the kernel (http://www.ker
> neltraffic.org/kernel-traffic/kt20030616_219.html#3).

> this current patch includes the original PAT support and the new cachemap
> mechanism. note that the cachemap mechanism does not actually change any
> caching attributes, it only keeps track of the attributes and tests
> regions. I think the end idea would be that drivers would use the normal
> ioremap/change_page_attr/remap_page_range mechanisms like they already
> do, and these mechanisms would in turn use cachemap to make sure there's
> no conflicts. I'm completely open to how any specific details should
> work, and any changes needed to be made.

Yeah, I've experemented recently with PAT too.  Not had a chance to look at
the code in any specifics.  But I did notice there appear to be no notes or
warnings on the issues of using PAT based mappings.  Cirtainly there are
some _very_ onerus restrictions which I have personally tested and found to
be true :(.  Perhaps we could get some big fat warning style comments.

Cirtainly the documentation is _very_ specific about this limitation, I
think I saw this being implmented in the code.

+ * According to the INTEL documentation it is the systems responsibility
+ * to ensure that the PAT registers are kept in agreement on all processors
+ * in a system.  Changing these registers must occu in a manner which
+ * maintains the consistency of the processor caches and translation
+ * lookaside buggers (TLB).  

Also, I have confirmed that if you have any Intel processors which do not
have the SS (Self Snoop) capability, you cannot have two independent
mappings to a page with different cache attributes.  I have been hit by
this and you get stale data returned from the cache.

-apw