On Mon, 2006-11-20 at 16:15 +0200, Constantine Kousoulos wrote:
> All the above solutions aim to make Mach unaware of any memory
> above 1 GB. Isn't it possible to utilise all the memory? I will
> explain myself.
I think this is clearly right, but it may well require more substantial
changes to
Constantine Kousoulos, le Mon 20 Nov 2006 16:27:07 +0200, a écrit :
> Oops wrong copy-paste. Correct my previous email with this:
>
> ... Mach's virtual address space is 4 GB big according to this
> entry in gnumach/i386/i386/vm_param.h: #define
> LINEAR_MAX_KERNEL_ADDRESS ((vm_offset_t) 0xf
Samuel Thibault wrote:
Constantine Kousoulos, le Mon 20 Nov 2006 16:27:07 +0200, a écrit :
Oops wrong copy-paste. Correct my previous email with this:
... Mach's virtual address space is 4 GB big according to this
entry in gnumach/i386/i386/vm_param.h: #define
LINEAR_MAX_KERNEL_ADDRESS ((vm_o
Hello,
All the above solutions aim to make Mach unaware of any memory
above 1 GB. Isn't it possible to utilise all the memory? I will
explain myself.
Why don't we make Mach's kernel address space larger so that the
whole memory can fit inside it? Mach's virtual address space is 4
GB big acc
In gnumach/i386/include/mach/i386/vm_param.h:
/* User address spaces are 3GB each,
starting at virtual and linear address 0. */
#define VM_MIN_ADDRESS ((vm_offset_t) 0)
#define VM_MAX_ADDRESS ((vm_offset_t) 0xc000)
In gnumach/i386/i386/vm_param.h:
/* The kernel address s
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
On Mon, 2006-11-20 at 16:15 +0200, Constantine Kousoulos wrote:
All the above solutions aim to make Mach unaware of any memory
above 1 GB. Isn't it possible to utilise all the memory? I will
explain myself.
I think this is clearly right, but it may well require more
On Tue, Nov 21, 2006 at 02:12:33PM +0200, Constantine Kousoulos wrote:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> >On Mon, 2006-11-20 at 16:15 +0200, Constantine Kousoulos wrote:
> >>All the above solutions aim to make Mach unaware of any memory
> >>above 1 GB. Isn't it possible to utilise all the memory? I w
