Messages in this thread | | | From | Daniel Phillips <> | Subject | Re: discontiguous memory platforms | Date | Wed, 1 May 2002 16:08:11 +0200 |
| |
On Thursday 02 May 2002 16:00, Roman Zippel wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, 1 May 2002, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > > > Just to throw in an alternative: On m68k we map currently everything > > > together into a single virtual area. This means the virtual<->physical > > > conversion is a bit more expensive and mem_map is simply indexed by the > > > the virtual address. > > > > Are you talking about mm_ptov and friends here? What are the loops for? > > It simply searches through all memory nodes, it's not really efficient. > > > Could you please describe the most extreme case of physical discontiguity > > you're handling? > > I can't assume anything. I'm thinking about calculating the table > dynamically and patching the kernel at bootup, we are already doing > something similiar in the Amiga/ppc kernel.
Maybe this is a good place to try out a hash table variant of config_nonlinear. It's got to be more efficient than searching all the nodes, don't you think?
-- Daniel - 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/
| |