![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
>>>>> On Mon, 05 Aug 2002 21:58:17 -0700 (PDT), "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> said: >> From: David Mosberger <davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com> Date: >> Mon, 5 Aug 2002 22:01:16 -0700 >> In my opinion, this is perhaps the strongest argument >> *for* a separate "giant page" syscall interface. It will be >> very hard (perhaps impossible) to optimize superpages to work >> efficiently when the ratio of superpage/basepage grows huge >> (as, by definition, the kernel would manage them as a set of >> basepages). DaveM> Actually, this is one of the reasons there was a lot of DaveM> research into using sub-page clustering for large mappings in DaveM> the TLB. Basically how this worked is that for a superpage, DaveM> you could stick multiple sub-mappings into the entry such DaveM> that you didn't need a fully physically contiguous superpage. Sounds great if you have the hardware that can do it. Not too many CPUs I know of support it. --david - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:27 [W:0.035 / U:0.410 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | |||||||||||||