Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 7 Jul 1999 20:10:30 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com>
To:        Patryk Zadarnowski <patrykz@mycenae.ilion.eu.org>
Cc:        Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>, Peter Jeremy <jeremyp@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Bursting at the seams (was: Heh heh, humorous lockup) 
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.3.95.990707195151.23943i-100000@current1.whistle.com>
In-Reply-To: <199907080236.MAA16726@mycenae.ilion.eu.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, Patryk Zadarnowski wrote:

> 
> > Why not put the kernel in a different address space?  IIRC there's no
> > absolute requirement for the kernel and userland to be in the same
> > address space, and that way we would have 4 GB for each.
> 
> Wouldn't that make system calls that need to share data between kernel
> and user  spaces hopelessly  inefficient?  Things like  sysctl() would
> need to introduce (temporary)  memory mappings, and someone would have
> to keep  track of these mappings  and remove them as  required, or the
> kernel would probably run out of  address space in no time, given even
> with 4GB to spare. On  top of that, every mapping established requires
> some  messing arround with  the TLB,  which, at  least on  pentium, is
> rather expensive.

All user data is imported and exported to the kernel using 
special calls anyhow, as we've always thought that we may want to go back
to the separate address spaces that we asarted out with on the 11-40
and 11-45 (etc.)

so technically it wouldn't make too much work as far as altering the
kernel.

I guess however, having thought about it, that we'd have to reload CR3
on a syscall and that'd flush the TLBs which would be a pain..

> 
> Incidentally,  someone already experimented  with such  "dual" address
> spaces on Linux, and  the result was a 30% or so  slow down. If you're
> interested, I can  give you the relevant references  (the scenario was
> somewhat  different, but  the source  of the  performance hit  was the
> "dual" address space.)
> 
> patryk.
> 
> 
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
> 



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95.990707195151.23943i-100000>