> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Lutomirski [mailto:l...@amacapital.net]
> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2014 5:01 PM
> To: Thomas Gleixner
> Cc: Kani, Toshimitsu; Elliott, Robert (Server Storage); h...@zytor.com;
> mi...@redhat.com; a...@linux-foundation.org; a...@arndb.de; linux-
> m...@kvack.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; jgr...@suse.com;
> stefan.ba...@canonical.com; h...@hmh.eng.br; yi...@plexistor.com;
> konrad.w...@oracle.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/7] x86, mm, pat: Add pgprot_writethrough() for
> WT
>
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Thomas Gleixner <t...@linutronix.de>
> wrote:
...
> On the other hand, I thought that _GPL was supposed to be more about
> whether the thing using it is inherently a derived work of the Linux
> kernel. Since WT is an Intel concept, not a Linux concept, then I
> think that this is a hard argument to make.
IBM System/360 Model 85 (1968) had write-through (i.e., store-through)
caching. Intel might claim Write Combining, though.
N�����r��y����b�X��ǧv�^�){.n�+����{����zX����ܨ}���Ơz�&j:+v�������zZ+��+zf���h���~����i���z� �w���?�����&�)ߢf��^jǫy�m��@A�a���
0��h���i
