From: joe Shmoe <jsmoe3@yahoo.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: kernel page table mapping for >1GB <3 GB for x86 arch without PAE
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 07:40:34 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <477591.96177.qm@web45216.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090828231603.7918be05@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Hey Alan,
May be I confused you. Sorry
> 0-3GB MMU translations
> to arbitary basically random
> physical addresses (with many pages shared and some
> absent)
Can those "arbitary basically random physical addresses" fall outside
1GB-3GB is my question. Why does kernel stop at 896MB during page table setup. Why not go ahead and map the remaining available RAM (where RAM size is > 1GB < 4GB)
But kernel uses different technique for addressing the high memory > 896MB
Not sure this is being done so that it will be easier for kernel to maintain page table assignments/swaping to various processes.
> 3GB+ Physical mapping
> only accessible in kernel mode
Yes. This part I understand obviously these addresses are issued only when a process is running in kernel mode.
--- On Fri, 8/28/09, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
> Subject: Re: kernel page table mapping for >1GB <3 GB for x86 arch without PAE
> To: "joe Shmoe" <jsmoe3@yahoo.com>
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Date: Friday, August 28, 2009, 6:16 PM
> O> I understand the implications
> of reloading CR3. But once the page tables are setup
> to map all the available physical RAM to virtual (linear)
> address it could be for eg. 1, 2, 3 or 4 GB how does it
> matter.
>
> Where are you putting the user virtual addresses. User
> addresses don't
> map direct to physical addresses so you need both sets of
> translations at
> once
>
> Right now you have
>
> 0-3GB MMU translations
> to arbitary basically random
> physical addresses (with many pages shared and some
> absent)
>
> 3GB+ Physical mapping
> only accessible in kernel mode
>
> If user applications ran with a 1:1 mapping of application
> space to
> physical addresses you would be fine - but they don't and
> it would be
> rather hard to run like that because you want page sharing,
> lazy unshare,
> vfork etc to all work.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-29 14:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-28 18:08 joe Shmoe
2009-08-28 18:12 ` Roland Dreier
2009-08-28 18:40 ` joe Shmoe
2009-08-28 19:13 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2009-08-28 19:44 ` joe Shmoe
2009-08-28 19:53 ` Alan Cox
2009-08-28 20:23 ` joe Shmoe
2009-08-28 22:16 ` Alan Cox
2009-08-29 0:20 ` joe Shmoe
2009-08-29 13:05 ` Alan Cox
2009-08-29 14:40 ` joe Shmoe [this message]
2009-08-28 21:07 ` joe Shmoe
2009-08-28 22:11 ` Alan Cox
2009-08-28 19:49 ` Roland Dreier
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=477591.96177.qm@web45216.mail.sp1.yahoo.com \
--to=jsmoe3@yahoo.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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
Powered by JetHome