Brooks Davis wrote:
Arg. Thanks for the catch.
-- Brooks
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 09:47:17AM +0100, Niclas Zeising wrote:
[Sorry brooks, forgot to use "reply all", resending]
Brooks Davis wrote:
brooks 2008-03-28 08:19:03 UTC
FreeBSD src repository
Modified files:
sys/i386/i38
Arg. Thanks for the catch.
-- Brooks
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 09:47:17AM +0100, Niclas Zeising wrote:
> [Sorry brooks, forgot to use "reply all", resending]
>
> Brooks Davis wrote:
>> brooks 2008-03-28 08:19:03 UTC
>>
>> FreeBSD src repository
>>
>> Modified files:
>> sys/i386/i38
[Sorry brooks, forgot to use "reply all", resending]
Brooks Davis wrote:
brooks 2008-03-28 08:19:03 UTC
FreeBSD src repository
Modified files:
sys/i386/i386pmap.c
Log:
Use ; instead of : to end a line.
Submitted by: Niclas Zeising
Revision ChangesPa
On Saturday 29 April 2006 21:23, Julian Elischer wrote:
> Peter Wemm wrote:
> >In more detail. There is one PTE per page of virtual address space.
> > It is used by the hardware to translate a virtual address access
> > to a physical address. One normally stores the corresponding
> > physical
>
On Saturday 29 April 2006 11:52, Suleiman Souhlal wrote:
> Nate Lawson wrote:
> > Peter Wemm wrote:
> >> Stephan realized that the kernel already allocates one PTE per
> >> virtual page. Although it normally holds physical addresses plus
> >> attributes, as long as we don't set PG_V, then there ar
On Saturday 29 April 2006 11:35, Alan Cox wrote:
> Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 10:21:11AM -0700, Peter Wemm wrote:
> >> page of address space by unlinking the head of the ptelist.
> >> Freeing a page is as simple as storing it on the head. I'm
> >> running my laptop with that
On Monday 01 May 2006 14:32, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
> Just curious what does it bring us in terms of performance/memory
> savings?
Mostly neutral performance. It allows us to free otherwise unused
memory.
> -Maxim
>
> Peter Wemm wrote:
> > peter 2006-05-01 21:22:38 UTC
> >
> > FreeBSD src
Just curious what does it bring us in terms of performance/memory savings?
-Maxim
Peter Wemm wrote:
peter 2006-05-01 21:22:38 UTC
FreeBSD src repository
Modified files:
sys/i386/i386pmap.c
Log:
Using an idea from Stephan Uphoff, use the empty pte's that correspond
On Sat, 2006-Apr-29 10:21:11 -0700, Peter Wemm wrote:
>In more detail. There is one PTE per page of virtual address space. It
>is used by the hardware to translate a virtual address access to a
>physical address. One normally stores the corresponding physical
>address in there with various co
Peter Wemm wrote:
In more detail. There is one PTE per page of virtual address space. It
is used by the hardware to translate a virtual address access to a
physical address. One normally stores the corresponding physical
[...]
I hope this is all in a comment next to the code, right?
Nate Lawson wrote:
Peter Wemm wrote:
Stephan realized that the kernel already allocates one PTE per virtual
page. Although it normally holds physical addresses plus attributes,
as long as we don't set PG_V, then there are 31 other bits that we
could use for data storage. We could put virtua
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 10:21:11AM -0700, Peter Wemm wrote:
page of address space by unlinking the head of the ptelist. Freeing a
page is as simple as storing it on the head. I'm running my laptop
with that code right now.
I'm running on a couple of machines to
On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 10:21:11AM -0700, Peter Wemm wrote:
> page of address space by unlinking the head of the ptelist. Freeing a
> page is as simple as storing it on the head. I'm running my laptop
> with that code right now.
I'm running on a couple of machines too (WITNESS + INVARIANTS) u
Peter Wemm wrote:
Stephan realized that the kernel already allocates one PTE per virtual
page. Although it normally holds physical addresses plus attributes,
as long as we don't set PG_V, then there are 31 other bits that we
could use for data storage. We could put virtual addresses in there
On Friday 28 April 2006 10:36 pm, Nate Lawson wrote:
> Peter Jeremy wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-Apr-28 14:22:34 -0700, Peter Wemm wrote:
> >> On Friday 28 April 2006 12:05 pm, Peter Wemm wrote:
> >>> ups@ had a truely evil idea that I'll investigate. It should
> >>> allow freeing unused pages again
Peter Jeremy wrote:
On Fri, 2006-Apr-28 14:22:34 -0700, Peter Wemm wrote:
On Friday 28 April 2006 12:05 pm, Peter Wemm wrote:
ups@ had a truely evil idea that I'll investigate. It should allow
freeing unused pages again by giving us a no-cost way to track the
holes in the kva block.
FW
On Fri, 2006-Apr-28 14:22:34 -0700, Peter Wemm wrote:
>On Friday 28 April 2006 12:05 pm, Peter Wemm wrote:
>> ups@ had a truely evil idea that I'll investigate. It should allow
>> freeing unused pages again by giving us a no-cost way to track the
>> holes in the kva block.
>
>FWIW, this ide
On Friday 28 April 2006 12:05 pm, Peter Wemm wrote:
> ups@ had a truely evil idea that I'll investigate. It should allow
> freeing unused pages again by giving us a no-cost way to track the
> holes in the kva block.
FWIW, this idea appears to work. For the curious:
http://people.freebsd.o
18 matches
Mail list logo
