From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-Id: <200102082114.QAA25048@mal-ach.watson.ibm.com> To: Roman Zippel Cc: paulus@linuxcare.com.au, Dan Malek , Gabriel Paubert , tom_gall@vnet.ibm.com, linuxppc-commit@hq.fsmlabs.com, linuxppc-dev Subject: Re: context overflow In-Reply-To: Message from Roman Zippel of "Thu, 08 Feb 2001 21:53:13 +0100." Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 16:14:28 -0500 From: David Edelsohn Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: >>>>> Roman Zippel writes: > On Thu, 8 Feb 2001, David Edelsohn wrote: >> We really need to get more IBM PowerPC and kernel VMM experts >> involved to explore the best design given the Linux kernel's abstractions >> and limitations in the VMM space. Roman> There is certainly room for improvement, but slowly I'd really like to Roman> know why the Linux vmm should be/is the limiting part? I did not say that Linux VMM is the limiting part, I said that the design needs to work within the Linux VMM limitations. The Linux VMM still uses the x86 page table design as a basis for its abstraction layer. Not all processors match that configuration. David ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/