[lkml]   [2002]   [Aug]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: fix CONFIG_HIGHPTE
    Anton Blanchard wrote:
    > > We're piling more and more crap in there to support these pte_chains.
    > > How much is too much?
    > >
    > > Is it likely that large pages and/or shared pagetables would allow us to
    > > place pagetables and pte_chains in the direct-mapped region, avoid all
    > > this?
    > On ppc64 shared pagetables will require significant changes to the way
    > we handle the hardware hashtable. So add that to the "more and more crap
    > in there to support these pte_chains"

    Last I heard, pagetable sharing wasn't working out too well
    because they all get unshared.

    > Will shared pagetables be a requirement or can we turn it on per arch?

    It's doubtful if per-arch would be an option.

    How about this?

    - We rely on large pages to solve the Oracle problem

    - I'll do pte_chain_highmem and keep that and Bill's patch under test
    in my tree on a wait-and-see basis. Could go ahead and submit it
    but it's all more complexity, and it'd be nice to actually pull
    something out for a change.

    - We'll continue to suck for the University workload.
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:27    [W:0.030 / U:31.328 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site