From: Brian Gerst <bgerst@didntduck.org>
To: Jesse Pollard <pollard@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil>
Cc: ttabi@interactivesi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: What is the truth about Linux 2.4's RAM limitations?
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 14:28:54 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3B4B4966.996DD91E@didntduck.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200107101812.NAA01171@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil>
Jesse Pollard wrote:
>
> Timur Tabi <ttabi@interactivesi.com>:
> > Jesse Pollard wrote:
> > >>So what are the limits without using PAE? Here I'm still having a little
> > >>problem finding definitive answers but ...
> > >>
> > >3 GB. Final answers are in the FAQ, and have been discussed before. You can
> > >also look in the Intel 80x86 CPU specifications.
> > >
> > >The only way to exceed current limits is via some form of segment register usage
> > >which will require a different compiler and a replacement of the memory
> > >architecture of x86 Linux implementation.
> > >
> >
> > Are you talking about using 48-bit pointers?
> >
> > (48-bit pointers, aka 16:32 pointers, on x86 are basically "far 32-bit
> > pointers". That is, each pointer is stored as a 48-bit value, where 16
> > bits are for the selector/segment, and 32 bits are for the offset.
>
> That sounds right - I'm not yet fully familiar with the low level intel
> x86 design yet. There is also (based on list email) a limit to how
> many page tables can be active. Two is desirable (one system, one user)
> but the x86 design only has one. This causes Linux (and maybe others too)
> to split the 32 bit range into a 3G (user) and 1G (system) address ranges
> to allow the page cache/cpu cache to work in a more optimum manner. If
> the entire page table were given to a user, then a full cache flush would
> have to be done on every context switch and system call. That would be
> very slow, but would allow a full 4G address for the user.
A full cache flush would be needed at every entry into the kernel,
including hardware interrupts. Very poor for performance.
> The use of 48 bit addresses has the same problem. Doing the remapping for
> the segment + offset requires flushing the cache as well (the cache seems
> to be between the segment registers and the page tables - not sure, not
> necessarily coreect... I still have to get the new CPU specs...)
>
> Any body want to offer a full reference? Or a tutorial on Intel addressing
> capability?.
Using segmentation does not give you access to any more memory without
dirty hacks using fault handlers. The segment base is added to the
offset to get a linear address (truncated to 32 bits). This linear
address is fed through the page tables to get the physical address.
--
Brian Gerst
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-07-10 18:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-07-10 18:12 What is the truth about Linux 2.4's RAM limitations? Jesse Pollard
2001-07-10 18:22 ` Jonathan Lundell
2001-07-10 18:28 ` Brian Gerst [this message]
2001-07-10 18:43 ` Chris Wedgwood
2001-07-10 19:35 ` Brian Gerst
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-07-11 4:31 alad
2001-07-10 21:49 Jesse Pollard
2001-07-10 22:07 ` Jonathan Lundell
2001-07-10 18:38 Jesse Pollard
2001-07-10 19:14 ` Mark H. Wood
2001-07-09 21:29 Jesse Pollard
2001-07-10 17:01 ` Timur Tabi
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.32.0107091250170.25061-100000@maus.spack.org.suse.lists.linux.kernel>
2001-07-09 21:03 ` Andi Kleen
2001-07-09 20:01 Adam Shand
2001-07-09 21:15 ` Brian Gerst
2001-07-09 21:18 ` Rik van Riel
2001-07-09 22:17 ` Matti Aarnio
2001-07-10 13:49 ` Chris Wedgwood
2001-07-10 17:03 ` Timur Tabi
2001-07-10 17:35 ` Richard B. Johnson
2001-07-10 18:01 ` Timur Tabi
2001-07-10 18:08 ` Jonathan Lundell
2001-07-10 18:45 ` Richard B. Johnson
2001-07-10 19:26 ` Jonathan Lundell
2001-07-10 23:56 ` Jesse Pollard
2001-07-10 20:19 ` Malcolm Beattie
2001-07-10 3:01 ` jlnance
2001-07-10 3:29 ` Michael Bacarella
2001-07-16 8:37 ` Ingo Oeser
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=3B4B4966.996DD91E@didntduck.org \
--to=bgerst@didntduck.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pollard@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil \
--cc=ttabi@interactivesi.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