From owner-freebsd-arch Thu Jan 30 11: 9:33 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 5959637B405 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2003 11:09:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C13E443F85 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2003 11:09:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from arr@watson.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fledge.watson.org (8.12.6/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h0UJ9CP3027415; Thu, 30 Jan 2003 14:09:12 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from arr@watson.org) Received: from localhost (arr@localhost) by fledge.watson.org (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) with SMTP id h0UJ9CST027412; Thu, 30 Jan 2003 14:09:12 -0500 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: fledge.watson.org: arr owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 14:09:11 -0500 (EST) From: "Andrew R. Reiter" To: Julian Elischer Cc: David Schultz , Terry Lambert , Scott Long , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: PAE (was Re: bus_dmamem_alloc_size()) In-Reply-To: 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, Julian Elischer wrote: : : :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..) : : Ya, well Im glad you brought that up, b/c aside from the anti-PAE rants that have been coming across (which are of ZERO USE -- THX FOR THAT), I do believe there are uses for it. I am glad to hear that someone is on it :) Thanks to them and those who organized the project for it. Cheers, Andrew -- Andrew R. Reiter arr@watson.org arr@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message