Subject: Re: kernel map entry merging and PR 24039
To: None <email@example.com>
From: YAMAMOTO Takashi <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 12/03/2004 14:38:48
> >and of course, regardless of what pmap(1) shows, you always have
> >>=1000 reserved entries.
> i do? where?
> the main point is that whether you merge or not, you can *always* get
> into a situation where you need to allocate in order to de-allocate.
> there's nothing stopping me from allocating three contiguous pages
> (covered by one map entry) and then freeing the middle one when
> there's no free memory left. not merging map entries when possible
> simply makes this more likely, afaict.
we're talking about pool(9) and its friends, which never do such a thing.