From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1Md1tq-0006Yc-9q for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Aug 2009 09:05:22 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Md1tp-0006XV-10 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Aug 2009 09:05:21 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Md1tk-0006RF-9S for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Aug 2009 09:05:20 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=56072 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Md1tk-0006R5-16 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Aug 2009 09:05:16 -0400 Received: from xvm-190-8.ghst.net ([217.70.190.8]:55474 helo=aybabtu.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Md1tj-0002qG-DK for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Aug 2009 09:05:15 -0400 Received: from [192.168.10.10] (helo=thorin) by aybabtu.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Md1tU-0005Sr-7F for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Aug 2009 15:05:00 +0200 Received: from rmh by thorin with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Md1tT-0007rd-KY for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Aug 2009 15:04:59 +0200 Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 15:04:59 +0200 From: Robert Millan To: The development of GRUB 2 Message-ID: <20090817130459.GB32551@thorin> References: <20090813204844.GL22130@thorin> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: free as in freedom X-Message-Flag: Worried about Outlook viruses? Switch to Thunderbird! www.mozilla.com/thunderbird X-Debbugs-No-Ack: true User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) Subject: Re: [RFT] Re: Policy-based memory allocations (was Re: RFC: 1.97 roadmap) X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GRUB 2 List-Id: The development of GRUB 2 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 13:05:21 -0000 On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 09:35:37PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote: > Actually I don't understand why it was proposed to include it in 1.97 > at all - it changes memory management, bugs in it are likely to be > critical and benefit is only smaller core. If it was up to me I would > just postpone it. But it's possible to put it in 1.97 if someone tests > it enough. Well, I was expecting that this wouldn't have to change anything on how the "normal" heap works. The heap we have now doesn't add low memory to its arena, so in theory it's possible for another mechanism which reuses the same functions to use a separate region that doesn't disrupt normal heap operation in any way. This solves the problem with bloat in startup.S, which is the reason I proposed lowmem heap as a feature for 1.97. But I agree that approaches that change internal heap structures shouldn't be pushed to 1.97. -- Robert Millan The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."