lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Aug]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateTue, 06 Aug 2002 19:57:07 -0700
FromAndrew Morton <>
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 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    [from the cache]
©2003-2008