From: "Rajat Jain" <rajat.noida.india@gmail.com>
To: Prasad Joshi <prasadjoshi124@gmail.com>
Cc: vivekutal@gmail.com, Rick Brown <rick.brown.3@gmail.com>,
kernelnewbies <kernelnewbies@nl.linux.org>,
linux-newbie@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: need for 3G/1G split
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 12:05:34 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b115cb5f0703212335k579ce76et4c4f87d10131885f@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fe291c8c0703212241o7d6909aj3acca12da7294260@mail.gmail.com>
On 3/22/07, Prasad Joshi <prasadjoshi124@gmail.com> wrote:
> 3/21/07, Vivek <vivekutal@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Why is kernel restricted to use virtual addresses of only 1 GB? Or
> > > what is the need to split up the virtual address space into user
> > > addresses and kernel addresses?
> >
> > We can have 4GB for kernel and 4GB for userspace but this has a overhead
> > of flushing of tlb for every syscall.
> > You can also make the split 2/2GB but this has a problem of having less
> > user address space.
> > 3/1 is a better choice.
>
> Does TLB size change 4, 3, or 2 GB virtual addresses are used? I
> though it would be same irrespective of whether virtual addresses are
> 4 or 1 GB.
> If the TLB size is at all same for any number of virtual addresses
> then what difference it make while flushing the TLB?
>
The difference is that the TLB needs not be flushed for the kernel
virtual addresses because it remains the same for each processes. The
bigger the kernel virtual address space the better it is (but lesser
virtual memory for user space).
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" 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.linux-learn.org/faqs
prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-03-22 6:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-03-21 4:15 need for 3G/1G split Rick Brown
2007-03-21 10:38 ` Vivek
2007-03-22 5:41 ` Sandeep Kumar
2007-03-22 5:41 ` Prasad Joshi
2007-03-22 6:35 ` Rajat Jain [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=b115cb5f0703212335k579ce76et4c4f87d10131885f@mail.gmail.com \
--to=rajat.noida.india@gmail.com \
--cc=kernelnewbies@nl.linux.org \
--cc=linux-newbie@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=prasadjoshi124@gmail.com \
--cc=rick.brown.3@gmail.com \
--cc=vivekutal@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox