On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:49 AM, Jerome Glisse <j.glisse@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 5:35 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 6:37 AM, Jerome Glisse <j.glisse@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 7:58 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>> Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> >>>>> Reviewed-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@xxxxxxx> >>>> >>>> I believe it will break something but we could deal with the fallout >>>> once it happens. >>> >>> FWIW, I'm running with this code on my machine right now using the >>> radeon driver. Everything seems fine. If I build without MTRRs and >>> without PAT, though, graphics are slow (as expected). So I think >>> everything's okay. >>> >>> --Andy >> >> I am worried on p4 where i last see issue with that notably with agp. > > Do you remember any details? It looks like PAT is enabled on Pentium > 4 (i.e. famliy 0xF). > > --Andy No i don't, i think it was some pat errata on those about non real ram address and with agp. Memory is fuzzy. I might have time in couple of week to plug back my p4 and see how it behave. Cheers, Jerome -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fbdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
