From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Harry Kalogirou <harkal@gmx.net>
Subject: Re: Small-C revisited
Date: 05 Jun 2002 23:52:40 +0300
Sender: linux-8086-owner@vger.kernel.org
Message-ID: <1023309881.2364.16.camel@cool>
References: <Pine.GSU.4.21.0206042021550.19377-100000@garcia.efn.org> 
	<1023298079.2442.6.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
Return-path: <linux-8086-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <1023298079.2442.6.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk>
List-Id: <linux-8086.vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-7"
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Ken Martwick <kenm@efn.org>, Linux-8086 <linux-8086@vger.kernel.org>

=D4=E7=ED =D4=E5=F4, 05-06-2002 =F3=F4=E9=F2 20:27, =EF/=E7 Alan Cox =DD=
=E3=F1=E1=F8=E5:
=20
> Our current binary format is the minix one and has the same design fl=
aw.
> Minix doesn't support swapping so allocates a program data as
>=20
> 		Data
> 		<space>
> 		Stack
>=20
> And brk()/malloc etc expand into pre-reserved space. Chmem adjusts th=
at
> space. What probably should happen since we do have swap is that we
> allocate
>=20
> 		Stack (size configured at compile/link time)
> 		Data
>=20
> We can then actually expand the program space if need be. On v7 swap =
is
> activated at boot up and they basically did
>=20
> 		if(room to just grow a bit)
> 			grow_it()
> 		else
> 			swap_it_out()
>=20
> and the swap back in would sort out a suitable sized chunk.
>=20

That is what I was planning to implement next. I'm currently working on
making an efficient memory defrager but I got bored when the ELKS tree
got uncompilable.

Harry



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-8086" i=
n
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html