Subject: re: subr_vmem.c supersedes subr_blist.c?
To: YAMAMOTO Takashi <email@example.com>
From: matthew green <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/06/2006 09:59:21
> Doesn't vmem(9) supersede the functionality in subr_blist.c? If so,
> the stuff that uses blists should be changed to use vmem, and
> subr_blist.c deleted from the tree.
> -- thorpej
uvm allocates a chunk of contiguous swap slots, and free them individually.
it can't be handled by vmem.
we can change the way uvm does swap slot handling if it is going
to be better handled by vmem.