On 3/30/06, Jack Steiner <steiner@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Is this problem unique to SN systems No, the same will happen on all other systems (that I know of). > The BIOS reports that most > memory ranges support both CACHED & UNCACHED references. I _think_ > this is correct. That's correct. The map shows the ways the page *can* be mapped, not the way it *should* be mapped. It's strange that ACPI would prefer to use WC when WB mapping is possible. They definitely need to pick one way and stick with it though. As you say, mapping the same page with different cacheability is a no-no (and at least in theory, it should cause an MCA even on real hardware). --david -- Mosberger Consulting LLC, http://www.mosberger-consulting.com/ - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|