> -----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