> I looked at it a year or two ago myself, and came to the
> conclusion that I don't want to blow up our page table size by a
> factor of three or more, so I'm not personally interested any
> more. Maybe somebody else comes up with a better way to do it,
> or with a really compelling reason to.
OTOH, it _would_ get rid of all the balancing issues in one
blow. And it would fix the aliasing issues and possibly the
memory fragmentation problem too.
And using something like Davem's lower-overhead reverse
mapping layer, we might just be able to pull off all (or most)
of the advantages with lower overhead ;)
[this is something I will be looking into for 2.5]
regards,
Rik
-- Virtual memory is like a game you can't win; However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose...http://www.surriel.com/ http://www.conectiva.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com.br/
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/