* Arjan van de Ven <arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> On 10/12/2009 04:10 AM, tip-bot for Arjan van de Ven wrote: >>> Commit-ID: c03cb3149daed3e411657e3212d05ae27cf1a874 >>> Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/c03cb3149daed3e411657e3212d05ae27cf1a874 >>> Author: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> AuthorDate: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 10:33:02 -0700 >>> Committer: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> >>> CommitDate: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 13:06:57 +0200 >>> >>> x86: Relegate CONFIG_PAT and CONFIG_MTRR configurability to EMBEDDED >>> >>> MTRR and PAT support (which got added to CPUs over 10 years ago) >>> are no longer really optional in that more and more things are >>> depending on PAT just working, including various drivers and newer >>> versions of X. (to not even speak of MTRR) >>> >>> Having this as a regular config option just no longer makes sense. >>> >>> This patch relegates CONFIG_X86_PAT to the EMBEDDED category so >>> ultra-embedded can still disable it if they really need to. >>> >> >> Should we combine this with removing the whitelist (which is largely >> vestigial at this point) and replace it with a blacklist (possibly >> empty)? I still haven't seen any evidence that there are any CPUs >> which have problems, and PAT support go back all the way to Pentium >> III -- and page table attributes can be used all the way back to 386, >> it just excludes the WC type. > > I would be in favor of that; other operating systems have been using > pat everywhere since the pII days anyway. Fine to me too. We only made it a whitelist to reduce the degrees of freedom early in the implementation - it stuck around needlessly long. Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tip-commits" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html