Messages in this thread | | | From | jmerkey@comcast ... | Subject | Re: 1GB/2GB/3GB User Space Splitting Patch 2.6.8.1 (PSEUDO SPAM) | Date | Thu, 26 Aug 2004 21:08:19 +0000 |
| |
> You're years late to this game. It's been thought about and the > consensus (which I disagreed with) was to reject virtualspace pressure > related changes of this kind for 32-bit platforms in favor of refusing > to support 32-bit platforms and/or workloads requiring them. >
This has nothing to do with only having 1GB of kernel address space and not enough virtual space to load a large swath of drivers or support modules loading reentrantly. It's a little difficult to quantify how much kernel address space will be needed when you don't know if a full configuration will fit into it. The fact people use this patch at all is **EVIDENCE THAT THERE ALREADY IS A PROBLEM** with limiting kernel address space to 1GB. And who the hell cares about a mouldy, antiquated ABI spec modeled after 1970 Unix technology anyway? It should be another option for executable formats. All this ABI compatibility huey is some Intel/SCO pipe dream for supporting applications across multiple Unix platforms anyway. If it doesn't run on Linux, who the hell cares?
:-)
Jeff - 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/
| |