At 01:30 01/11/2000, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> > Larry McVoy wrote:
> >> Are there processes with virtual memory?
>On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 03:38:00PM -0700, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
> > Yes.
>If that stack switch is your context switch then you share the same VM for all
>tasks. I think the above answer "yes" just means you have pagetables so
>swap, but you _must_ miss memory protection across different processes. That
>also mean any program can corrupt the memory of all the other programs. Even
>on the Palm that's a showstopper limitation (and on the Palm that's an
>limitation, not a software deficiency of PalmOS).
>That will never happen in linux, nor in windows, nor internally to kde2. It
>happens in uclinux to deal with hardware without MMU. And infact the agenda
>uses mips with memory protection even on a organizer with obvious advantages.
>Just think kde2 could have all the kde app sharing the same VM skipping
>tlb flushes by simply using clone instead of fork. Guess why they aren't doing
>that? And even if they would do that, the first bug would _only_ destabilize
>kde, so kill it and restart and everything else will keep running fine (you
>don't even need to kill X). With your ring 0 linux _everything_ will
No need for imagination. Reality shows it: In my experience Netware is very
unstable as an OS. - We are running 5 Netware servers here in College (used
to be 3.12 now are 4.11) and whenever we do any upgrades (e.g. new service
pack) the servers start crashing every day or so until we find one by one
all modules that are not SMP capable (I assume that this is the reason it
is crashing?) and take them out / replace them with 3rd party equivalent
modules. - Just to name some things: Novell FTP server, Xconsole and/or
associated modules, "Apple desktop rebuilding thing" module... - All of
those would cause the server to crash into the debugger when running SMP
usually with a page fault. - Admittedly Netware is great at file &
application serving so we use it but it gets nowhere near to the stability
of Linux. The number of times Linux production systems in College have
crashed can be counted on the fingers of my hand while I have lost count of
the Novell crashes a long time ago.
IMHO stability is more important than anything else. - I prefer to run 20
Linux servers which will result in no phonecalls at midnight calling me
into College to reboot them compared to a Netware server which runs as fast
as the 20 Linux servers but disturbs my out-of-working-hours time!
I agree that having ring 0 OS will improve performance, no doubt about
that, but at what price?
Just my 2p.
>And on sane architectures like alpha you don't even need to flush the TLB
>during "real" context switching so all your worry to share the same VM for
>everything is almost irrelevant there since it happens all the time anyways
>(until you overflow the available ASN bits that takes a lots of forks to
>So IMHO for you it's much saner to move all your performance critical code
>kernel space (that will be just stability-risky enough as khttpd and tux are).
>In 2.4.x that will avoid all the cr3 reloads and that will be enough as what
>you really care during fileserving are the copies that you must avoid.
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
>the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
>Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
-- "Education is what remains after one has forgotten everything he learned in school." - Albert Einstein -- Anton Altaparmakov Voice: +44-(0)1223-333541(lab) / +44-(0)7712-632205(mobile) Christ's College eMail: AntonA@bigfoot.com / email@example.com Cambridge CB2 3BU ICQ: 8561279 United Kingdom WWW: http://www-stu.christs.cam.ac.uk/~aia21/
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 07 2000 - 21:00:08 EST