From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 9 May 2002 17:40:02 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 9 May 2002 17:40:01 -0400 Received: from gateway-1237.mvista.com ([12.44.186.158]:50684 "EHLO hermes.mvista.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 9 May 2002 17:40:01 -0400 Subject: Re: x86 question: Can a process have > 3GB memory? From: Robert Love To: tchiwam Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rik van Riel , Gerrit Huizenga , Clifford White , oliendm@us.ibm.com In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.3 (1.0.3-4) Date: 09 May 2002 14:40:10 -0700 Message-Id: <1020980411.880.93.camel@summit> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2002-05-09 at 14:24, tchiwam wrote: > How about other architectures ? like PowerPc. > Last calculation I did used 11GB of ram (no swap) on a big Number > Muncher... Would it be nice to use the same code for testing on 32 > architectures with swap ? All 32-bit architectures have a 4GB address space, 64-bit architectures obviously have a much bigger one (depends on the arch how many bits are used for the address space). PPC obviously does not have the dumb physical memory limitations x86 has, however. Anyhow, Rik's mmap trick will work on any arch, not just x86. Robert Love