Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 22:38:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Jacob <mj@feral.com> To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> Cc: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org>, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, jhb@FreeBSD.org, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/bce if_bcereg.h Message-ID: <20060425223519.F65802@ns1.feral.com> In-Reply-To: <20060426103623.M1847@epsplex.bde.org> References: <444E7750.206@samsco.org> <200604251540.00170.jhb@freebsd.org> <444E7BFE.4040800@samsco.org> <20060425.173236.74726638.imp@bsdimp.com> <444EB6A1.3060901@samsco.org> <20060426103623.M1847@epsplex.bde.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Supporting sizes >= 4G sounds unreasonable. How can a single device > need or even address so much space, even on 64-bit arches? For vm, > virtual memory is sort of a device, but even it is limited to 4G on > 32-bit arches, and PAE on i386 isn't pessimized by using a larger than > necessary vm_size_t. I have need to support and help people sell machines that use 32GB of directly addressable memory. In fact, the EM64T cheat will shortly become an embarrasment to Intel when people find out that EM64T with PAE is *not* the same as Opteron (36 vs. 40). I'm afraid I don't understand the 'unreasonable' argument here. Linux is eating your lunch today. Do you want it to eat your dessert as well? -matt
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060425223519.F65802>