[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: physical address space management
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 06:19:24PM -0400, Nathan J. Williams wrote:
> David Young <dyoung%pobox.com@localhost> writes:
> > * abstract cache-control, execute- and write-protection features
> > of x86 MTRR, AMD Elan SC520, et cetera
> These are systems where there's a comparatively low-level setting of
> properties on regions. How does this interact with architectures where
> cacheability et al are MMU-level mapping properties?
pmap(9) and bus_dma(9) must respect the protection and properties
of any physical region that they map. Routines such as pmap_enter(),
pmap_kenter_pa(), pmap_zero_page(), pmap_copy_page(), and bus_dmamem_map()
need to make appropriate calls to the physmem manager.
On reflection, I have decided that the API needs the notions of
"exclusive/mandatory" and "advisory" properties and protection. One user
of a physical region may advise that a region should be cacheable.
Another user may mandate that the same region should be uncached.
The mandate trumps the advice, and the region will not be cached. If a
third user tries to mandate that the region is cached, then the operation
fails. Another user may exclude writers from a region with pmem(9).
A second user may advise pmem(9) that it will write the same region;
the second user's pmem(9) operation will fail with EPERM.
David Young OJC Technologies
dyoung%ojctech.com@localhost Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933 ext 24
Main Index |
Thread Index |