Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 15:32:15 -0500 (EST) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> To: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Interesting cross-fertilization with DfBSD Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040331151651.16745D-100000@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <406B0CB8.6030409@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 31 Mar 2004, Andre Oppermann wrote: > * Avoiding the KVM mappings and the related kernel_object > manipulations > required for those mappings saves a lot of cpu cycles when all > > you > want is a quick mapping into KVM. Yeah -- these issue was discussed extensively at the USENIX ATC FreeBSD Developer Summit last summer in San Antonio, and also to some extent at the FreeBSD Developer Summit following BSDCon in San Francisco last fall. There are tentative plans to move to unmapped and deferred mapping buffers in our I/O system (Peter, Jeff, Kirk, and Poul-Henning have the details), but this work is scheduled to be one of the major goals for the 6.x branch. Part of our goal, though, in preparing for 5.x has been to try and make sure APIs are moving in directions to support that goal. A simultaneous goal is to untangle the web of connections between the VM system meta-data and remaining mocked up (duplicated) meta-data for the buffer cache. It will be very interesting to see how it works out for Matt, and where his proposed approach is similar to or different from the tentative plans we've discussed. Obviously, we're willing to learn from any positive discoveries (and less positive ones) he makes along the way :-). Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects robert@fledge.watson.org Senior Research Scientist, McAfee Research
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040331151651.16745D-100000>