Subject: Re: ARM port organisation (was: Re: NetBSD/hpcarm snap code)
To: Jason R Thorpe , Ben Harris <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Chris Gilbert <email@example.com>
Date: 02/17/2001 21:58:21
On Saturday 17 February 2001 9:31 pm, Jason R Thorpe wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 07:20:23PM +0000, Ben Harris wrote:
> > > Well, 32M is a pretty small address space -- it's going to affect
> > > where you put the stack, is certainly going to affect shared
> > > libraries, etc., and may constitute a new ABI.
> > Heh. It's still bigger than the arm26 user address space.
> > Hmm. Could you dynamically enable it for processes whose hard memory
> > limits were low enough? That'd be cute.
> I guess you could run-time switch, sure...
Oddly enough the only thing I can think of that pushes the 32MB limit would
be compiling, mozilla, and some of the window managers, eg kde2, and even
then couldn't you just allocate the processes 2 sections apart until you hit
128 processes (gives you 128 processes of 64MB), then fill in the gaps if you
can (ok won't work in all cases but would cover most desktop users, certainly
wouldn't work for servers)
(of course I could be speaking rubbish, I've only glanced over the fcs stuff
in the arm arm)