From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Aug 2 14:23:56 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A695937B401 for ; Sat, 2 Aug 2003 14:23:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx01.netapp.com (mx01.netapp.com [198.95.226.53]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A1A943F3F for ; Sat, 2 Aug 2003 14:23:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kmacy@netapp.com) Received: from frejya.corp.netapp.com (frejya [10.10.20.91]) h72LNtQw029798; Sat, 2 Aug 2003 14:23:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cranford-fe.eng.netapp.com (cranford-fe.eng.netapp.com [10.56.10.106])h72LNtRa018021; Sat, 2 Aug 2003 14:23:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (kmacy@localhost)h72LNiA26460; Sat, 2 Aug 2003 14:23:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2003 14:23:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Kip Macy To: Shawn In-Reply-To: <1059859111.1532.0.camel@CPE-65-26-140-154.kc.rr.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Assembly Syscall Question X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2003 21:23:56 -0000 > Maybe, but they also support a lot of MMU-less architectures, so it may > have made things simpler for them to not depend on MMU. I wonder if NUMA > had any bearing on that as well... No. The initial design of their VM greatly preceded NUMA and uCLinux. It actually makes the system less portable in that it can require interspersing of machine dependent code in the machine independent parts when the machines page table layout differs from the default. The introduction to the UVM thesis has some good points in this regard. -Kip