Subject: Re: NetBSD without MMU ?
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Greg A. Woods <email@example.com>
Date: 04/12/2002 13:28:59
[ On , April 12, 2002 at 12:27:58 (-0400), Perry E. Metzger wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: NetBSD without MMU ?
> MINIX uses the x86 segment registers to much the same purpose as an
I don't know that I'd call the way MINIX uses the 8088 segment registers
as "base registers" really that much of an MMU-like function, though I
guess in comparison to something without any such feature (like maybe a
6502) it is a form of memory managment -- but it's not a separate MMU
(tightly or loosely coupled) -- its integrated into the programming
model of the main CPU.
> It is hard to do fork without any memory management at all.
Not really. Even if all you do is "bank" swapping (perhaps with a
reloacting loader so you can have at least more than one process in main
memory at a time and thus get useful work done why the memory manager
does, er, waits for, the swapping I/Os).
(in fact I would say an MMU makes implementing fork "harder"! :-)
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098; <firstname.lastname@example.org>; <email@example.com>; <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Planix, Inc. <email@example.com>; VE3TCP; Secrets of the Weird <firstname.lastname@example.org>