From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.lixom.net (lixom.net [66.141.50.11]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4407DDEB6 for ; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 12:07:01 +1000 (EST) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 21:11:05 -0500 From: Olof Johansson To: Will Schmidt Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use 1TB segments Message-ID: <20071003021105.GA6553@lixom.net> References: <18095.59959.698141.565343@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <1191350274.18159.279.camel@farscape.rchland.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1191350274.18159.279.camel@farscape.rchland.ibm.com> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Jon Tollefson , Paul Mackerras List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi, On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 01:37:54PM -0500, Will Schmidt wrote: > [RFC v2] 1TB Segment size support > > From: <> > > 1TB Segment size support > > This makes the kernel use 1TB segments for all kernel mappings and for > user addresses of 1TB and above, on machines which support them > (currently POWER5+ and POWER6). PA6T supports them as well :) > We don't currently use 1TB segments > for user addresses < 1T, since that would effectively prevent 32-bit > processes from using huge pages unless we also had a way to revert to > using 256MB segments. Wouldn't it be possible to stick with 1TB segments for the low range for 64-bit processes as well, and have them allocate their hugepages at >1TB? -Olof