From owner-freebsd-arch Thu Jan 30 11: 1:20 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E290937B401 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2003 11:01:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CBAC43F3F for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2003 11:01:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from InterJet.elischer.org (12-232-168-4.client.attbi.com[12.232.168.4]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53) with ESMTP id <20030130190117053001t9s5e>; Thu, 30 Jan 2003 19:01:18 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.elischer.org [127.0.0.1]) by InterJet.elischer.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA36023; Thu, 30 Jan 2003 11:01:16 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 11:01:15 -0800 (PST) From: Julian Elischer To: David Schultz Cc: Terry Lambert , "Andrew R. Reiter" , Scott Long , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: PAE (was Re: bus_dmamem_alloc_size()) In-Reply-To: <20030130175128.GA9891@HAL9000.homeunix.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, David Schultz wrote: > Thus spake Terry Lambert : > > David Schultz wrote: > > > Thus spake Terry Lambert : > > > > "Andrew R. Reiter" wrote: > > > > > Anyone know the status of PAE in fBSD? I heard rumors awhile back that > > > > > people had patches, or Y! had patches... but has anyone actually coughed > > > > > them up? > > > > > > > > Contact Paul Saab. > > > > > > A year ago, the rumor was that DG was eventually going to do it. > > > Six months ago it was Peter Wemm. And now Paul Saab?! Sheesh. > > > Why don't we just wait another few years so 64-bit machines solve > > > all our problems and we don't have to hack up the VM system? ;-) > > > > PSE36 is more intelligent than PAE, but neither one are very smart; > > they were put there by hardware people who thought that what software > > people wanted was more processes in RAM, not more RAM in individual > > processes. As such, they are a generally bad idea. Most people > > asking the question seem to have bought into the hardware people's > > picture of the universe, without understanding that. 8-(. > > More specifically, they are the same people who brought us bank > switching at least twice in the past, and lo and behold it still > isn't a very good idea. The reason for PAE is simple. Disk caches need not be in mapped memory. Physical memory will do. If you want to cache more than 4GB, then PAE is an effective answer. (Assuming I have my TLAs the right way around..) > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message