On Sat, Jun 07, 2003 at 06:28:43PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> Seems hardly worth the extra arithmetic given that the 2G limit
>> is actually bogus?
>> I just did mkswap/swapon of a 52G partition. That used 26MB of lowmem for
>> the swap map btw.
On Sat, Jun 07, 2003 at 06:38:27PM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> It's not clear precisely who or what would benefit from it; however,
> the decreased maximum of 32 swapfiles on i386 is a regression vs.
> 2.4.x's limit of 64, in whatever sense something no one cares about is
> actually a regression (in principle they could have merely not spoken
> up about it).
> In other words, if someone feels itchy because the number went down
> from 2.4.x, here it is. If not, I'm fine with leaving it be.
I went and worked out why it's wrong (_PAGE_PROTNONE) clash. Whatever
you do, don't apply it.
-- wli
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jun 15 2003 - 22:00:18 EST