Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 12 Aug 1997 18:22:38 +0200 (CEST) | From | Geert Uytterhoeven <> | Subject | Re: Memory Management - BSD vs Linux |
| |
On Tue, 12 Aug 1997, Malcolm Beattie wrote: > Douglas Jardine writes: > > I missed a couple of questions in my last mail: > > > > [7] In order to be able to run over different architectures, Linux > > implements a 3-level page table. It then rolls the architecture > > specific stuff into this 3-level organization. For example x86 > > has only 2-level page tables but these are appropriately munged > > into the 3-level organization. My question is that, are there > > any architectures out there for which this sort of transformation > > won't work? i.e does the transformation take away enough from > > the architectures strengths that other hacks are needed to be > > able to get reasonable performance? > > I wondered about that too. An interesting example would be the > inverted page tables of the RS6000 (and isn't PA-RISC either the > same or weird in a similar way: I know there's DVMA fun for PA-RISC). > Since nobody has tried porting Linux to RS6k (that I know about) and
The PPC601 is very similar to the RS/6000.
I'm not a PPC MMU expert, but AFAIK in Linux/PPC the `Intel style' MMU tree is converted on the fly to a PPC MMU tree.
Greetings,
Geert
-- Geert Uytterhoeven Geert.Uytterhoeven@cs.kuleuven.ac.be Wavelets, Linux/m68k on Amiga http://www.cs.kuleuven.ac.be/~geert/ Department of Computer Science -- Katholieke Universiteit Leuven -- Belgium
| |