Re: Ongoing 2.4 VM suckage

Rik van Riel
2001-08-03T21:25:19Z

On Fri, 3 Aug 2001, Anders Peter Fugmann wrote:

> I dont know task states are defined, but by 'running' I mean that it
> is not stopped by the VM, when the VM needs to fetch memory for the
> process.

What do you propose the program does when it doesn't have
its data ? Better give up the CPU for somebody else than
twiddle your thumbs while you don't have the data you want.

regards,

Rik
--
Virtual memory is like a game you can't win;
However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose...

http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/

Send all your spam to aardvark@nl.linux.org (spam digging piggy)