From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Jul 18 16:31:55 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id E724537B843; Tue, 18 Jul 2000 16:31:51 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from bright@fw.wintelcom.net)
Received: (from bright@localhost)
	by fw.wintelcom.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) id e6INVqK07166;
	Tue, 18 Jul 2000 16:31:52 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 16:31:52 -0700
From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>
To: hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: new kernel MALLOC flag.
Message-ID: <20000718163151.K13979@fw.wintelcom.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.4i
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

I was wondering if we could pass an additional flag to malloc
M_NOPHYS that would mean the kernel is free to move the physical
location of the memory.

It would signify things that the memory:
  1) won't be used for backing DMA.
  2) won't be entered into another kernel memory map.

This will allow us to have contigmalloc force-shuffle memory around
by copying it and doing vm tricks to remap it allowing us to grab
contig memory.

We could help facilitate having large regions of M_NOPHYS memory
by dividing the memory pool in half, M_NOPHYS allocations from one
end and !M_NOPHYS from the other end when possible.

-- 
-Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org]
"I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk."


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message