Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 22 Mar 2001 06:48:21 +0100
From:      Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>
To:        Mike Smith <msmith@FreeBSD.ORG>
Cc:        Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: remind me again, why is MAXPHYS only 128k ? 
Message-ID:  <94011.985240101@critter>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 21 Mar 2001 14:24:53 PST." <200103212224.f2LMOrh02530@mass.dis.org> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <200103212224.f2LMOrh02530@mass.dis.org>, Mike Smith writes:
>>     Another possibility for physio would be to MALLOC the pages
>>     array at the very top level of the syscall and pass it down
>>     through for use by lower layers.  At the very top level,
>>     before anything is locked, the MALLOC can block safely.
>
>This would deal with the async physio case too.
>
>I'm wondering how all this will interact with the general desire to avoid 
>mapping an I/O request into linear KVM before handing it to a driver; I 
>suspect probably not a lot...

That is more dependent on fixing the device driver API than anything
else.

--
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?94011.985240101>