Date: 08 Jul 1999 10:06:11 +0300 From: Ville-Pertti Keinonen <will@iki.fi> To: patrykz@mycenae.ilion.eu.org (Patryk Zadarnowski) Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Bursting at the seams (was: Heh heh, humorous lockup) Message-ID: <86lncrr57g.fsf@not.demophon.com> In-Reply-To: patrykz@mycenae.ilion.eu.org's message of "8 Jul 1999 10:00:15 %2B0300" References: <86oghnr62j.fsf@not.demophon.com> <199907080659.QAA17097@mycenae.ilion.eu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
patrykz@mycenae.ilion.eu.org (Patryk Zadarnowski) writes: > > You can't extend the address space that way, segments are all parts of > > the single 4GB address space described by the page mapping. > True, but you can reserve a part of the 4GB address space (say 128MB of it) > for partitioning into tiny (say 8MB) address spaces (which are still flat, > just small), for use by small processes, the idea being that all those small > processes will than share a single page table without compromising on memory > protection (the GDT is under full OS's control anyway), or the simplicity of > a flat address space (virtual addresses still start at 0 and continue till > the top of address space; the scheme is totally transparent.) Yeah, I know, I've read Liedtke's original paper where he described the optimization in L3, that's fine for that specific purpose, but that wasn't what the thread was about. Unless I totally missed the point. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?86lncrr57g.fsf>