From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Jan 26 22:52:03 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA23093 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 26 Jan 1998 22:52:03 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from cain.gsoft.com.au (genesi.lnk.telstra.net [139.130.136.161]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id WAA23071 for ; Mon, 26 Jan 1998 22:51:53 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from doconnor@cain.gsoft.com.au) Received: from cain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cain.gsoft.com.au (8.8.8/8.6.9) with ESMTP id RAA29592; Tue, 27 Jan 1998 17:21:33 +1030 (CST) Message-Id: <199801270651.RAA29592@cain.gsoft.com.au> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0zeta 7/24/97 To: joelh@gnu.org cc: mike@smith.net.au, dag-erli@ifi.uio.no, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: File I/O in kernel land (was: Re: 2nd warning: 2.2.6 BETA begins in 10 days!) In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 27 Jan 1998 00:37:51 MDT." <199801270637.AAA04478@detlev.UUCP> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 17:21:32 +1030 From: "Daniel O'Connor" Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk > My real concern is holding on to lots of dynamically allocated kernel > memory, which is something I can't see getting around without the > screen saver doing file I/O. In Linux, dynamic kernel memory was a > precious resource. Is it not so in FreeBSD? Umm, well wouldn't it be allocated in either case? You either load it in the kernel, or you load it in user land, and then copy it to the kernel.. You still take kernel memory to do it. --------------------------------------------------------------------- |Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software | |http://www.gsoft.com.au | |The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to| |choose from. -- Andrew Tanenbaum | ---------------------------------------------------------------------