Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 15:39:32 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: tinguely@plains.nodak.edu (Mark Tinguely) Cc: dg@root.com, terry@lambert.org, hackers@freebsd.org, jpt@msc.edu Subject: Re: Assumptions about kmem_malloc()... Message-ID: <199702282239.PAA02461@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199702282157.PAA20337@plains.nodak.edu> from "Mark Tinguely" at Feb 28, 97 03:57:36 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Why doesn't it push pages around to get a contiguous space so that > > it won't fail? > > that would work if everything is swappable. It is hard to fight those holes > when drivers that need wired contigous memory come and go through lkm > loads/unloads. > > Most driver allocations would puke if their memory got moved unless we go > to a double pointer arrangement, but (aaaaaaaaaahhhhhgg) I would not have > to be the one to have to debug VM problems). The kernel is an virtual-to-physical address space map, isn't it? You wouldn't need to introduce "handles" to do it, I think. It's not the kernel eating all the physical memory anyway. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199702282239.PAA02461>