From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Oct  4 14:23:23 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from bluerose.windmoon.nu (c255152-a.plstn1.sfba.home.com [24.176.132.48])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E78037B503
	for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed,  4 Oct 2000 14:23:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (fengyue@localhost)
	by bluerose.windmoon.nu (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id e94LPQ909345
	for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 14:25:26 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 14:25:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: FengYue <fengyue@bluerose.windmoon.nu>
To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: anonymous memory map vs mmap on /dev/zero
In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1000929152853.26541A-100000@fledge.watson.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.10.10010041412130.9343-100000@bluerose.windmoon.nu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG


Hi, excluding the extra kernel calls of open()/close() on /dev/zero,
which one of the following would be more efficient: 

1) Using mmap on /dev/zero
2) Using mmap with MAP_ANON flag

The purpose is, ofcourse, to share the memory (R&W) among all child
processes.

It seems that mmap on /dev/zero is more portable.

Thanks



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