Re: [PATCH] x86: pat cpu feature bit setting for known cpus

["Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Pallipadi, Venkatesh
<venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>  >-----Original Message-----
>  >From: Yinghai Lu [mailto:yhlu.kernel@gmail.com]
>  >Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 4:09 PM
>  >To: H. Peter Anvin
>  >Cc: Ingo Molnar; Pallipadi, Venkatesh; Thomas Gleixner; Andrew
>  >Morton; kernel list; Siddha, Suresh B
>  >Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: pat cpu feature bit setting for known cpus
>  >
>  >On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 4:06 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
>  >> Yinghai Lu wrote:
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >>  By the way, I want to clarify: I didn't mean it was
>  >*intended* as
>  >>  >>  vendor-lockin, just that it's an undesirable effect of this.
>  >>  >
>  >>  > if the PAT works, we may need to trim the memory
>  >according to MTRR, right?
>  >>  >
>  >>
>  >>  That doesn't seem like it's specific to PAT?
>  >
>  >could page table to  set WRBACK the range that is not covered
>  >by MTRR in e820..
>  >
>
>  Trimming of e820 memory is already done by Jesse's patch here
>  commit 99fc8d424bc5d80
>  Are you referring to similar thing?
>
Yes.

YH