From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=36901 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OjmqZ-0002Kw-AB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Aug 2010 01:30:28 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OjmqX-00030F-Tr for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Aug 2010 01:30:27 -0400 Received: from mail-wy0-f173.google.com ([74.125.82.173]:61534) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OjmqX-000301-NP for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Aug 2010 01:30:25 -0400 Received: by wyi11 with SMTP id 11so2360319wyi.4 for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2010 22:30:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 11:00:14 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] OS with only segmentation - will it be faster? From: C K Kashyap Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636416b970237e6048dadc738 List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: malc Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org --001636416b970237e6048dadc738 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Thanks Malc .. I'll check out the video ... and perhaps ping you off the list. On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 10:15 AM, malc wrote: > On Fri, 13 Aug 2010, C K Kashyap wrote: > > > Hi, > > This is not strictly qemu related but I think people who have a good idea > > about it must be on this list. > > I was wondering if I had an app that requires a fixed quantity of memory > - > > sufficiently less than the available physical memory. Would it benefit > from > > getting rid of the paging mechanism in the OS/hardware? > > As in, since the number of tasks are also fixed - we'd use only > segmentation > > to partition the VM area? Would eliminating the paging layer give good > > returns? > > > > Microsoft researchers working on Singularity claimed[1] that it does > provide significant speed improvements, and recent (few days ago) > discussion on comp.arch suggested as much (no need to go though TLB). > > [1] > http://channel9.msdn.com/shows/Going+Deep/Singularity-A-research-OS-written-in-C/ > (maybe the claim was made in some other video, in any case it should > be there on Channel 9) > > -- > mailto:av1474@comtv.ru > -- Regards, Kashyap --001636416b970237e6048dadc738 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thanks Malc .. I'll check out the video ... and perhaps ping you off th= e list.


On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 10:15= AM, malc <av1474@c= omtv.ru> wrote:
<= div class=3D"h5">On Fri, 13 Aug 2010, C K Kashyap wrote:

> Hi,
> This is not strictly qemu related but I think people who have a good i= dea
> about it must be on this list.
> I was wondering if I had an app that requires a fixed quantity of memo= ry -
> sufficiently less than the available physical memory. Would it benefit= from
> getting rid of the paging mechanism in the OS/hardware?
> As in, since the number of tasks are also fixed - we'd use only se= gmentation
> to partition the VM area? Would eliminating the paging layer give good=
> returns?
>

Microsoft researchers working on Singularity claimed[1] that it= does
provide significant speed improvements, and recent (few days ago)
discussion on comp.arch suggested as much (no need to go though TLB).

[1] http://channel9.msdn.com/shows/Goi= ng+Deep/Singularity-A-research-OS-written-in-C/
=A0 =A0(maybe the claim was made in some other video, in any case it shoul= d
=A0 =A0 be there on Channel 9)

--
mailto:av1474@comtv.ru



--
Regards,
Kash= yap
--001636416b970237e6048dadc738--