lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Oct]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: is there a limit on bss size?
    On Fri, Oct 06, 2000 at 12:32:35PM +0300, Petko Manolov wrote:
    > It is not so difficult as it looks.

    I don't see it being difficult at all ...

    > The master pgd looking as:
    >
    > .org 0x1000
    > ENTRY(swapper_pg_dir)
    > .long 0x00102007
    > .long 0x00103007
    > .fill BOOT_USER_PGD_PTRS-2,4,0
    > /* default: 766 entries */
    > .long 0x00102007
    > .long 0x00103007
    > /* default: 254 entries */
    > .fill BOOT_KERNEL_PGD_PTRS-2,4,0
    >
    >
    > should become:
    >
    >
    > .org 0x1000
    > ENTRY(swapper_pg_dir)
    > .long 0x00102007
    > .long 0x00103007
    > .... # every entry addresses 4 MB exactly
    > .... # so add as much as you want
    > .long 0x0010X007
    > .fill BOOT_USER_PGD_PTRS-X+2,4,0

    I'm unconvinced we need to map more than 4 MB into low virtual addresses;
    nothing seems to break with

    ENTRY(swapper_pg_dir)
    .long 0x00102007
    .fill BOOT_USER_PGD_PTRS-1,4,0

    here and I don't see anything that would break unless we moved head.S ...

    > But i honestly don't see the point of all that.

    Arbitrary kernel size limits are bad. Not complaining about a kernel
    that definitely won't boot while building is even worse, and I think
    the latter is actually pretty easy to fix ...
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 12:39    [W:0.024 / U:1.292 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site