From: "Daniel J Blueman" <daniel.blueman@gmail.com>
To: "Rick van Rein" <rick@groengemak.nl>
Cc: "Linux Kernel" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Future Linux on Bistable Storage
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 19:28:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6278d2220806021128h1dd76c16p9ab15142af2fcbdf@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
On 2 Jun, 14:40, Rick van Rein <rick@groengemak.nl> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Future generations of Linux are likely to run on machines with non-volatile
> memories based on bistable technologies. This will save the energy of DRAM
> refresh cycles and avoid the mechanical problems related to hard disks. The
> result is probably a computer with no distinction between disk and RAM.
>
> Such computer architectures can conserve a lot of energy, as it is very
> simple to suspend and resume them: no data loss means no time needed to
> resume the system -- except perhaps for I/O initialisation. Conserving
> energy means (1) having more fun|hours per kg of batteries, and (2) saving
> the planet.
>
> I wonder inhowfar Linux is (already) capable of dealing with such hardware.
> Several core concepts suddenly become meaningless if disk and RAM are merged
> into one storage device:
> * swapping out data
> * lazy loading of programs from disk to RAM
> * buffering disk blocks
> * mapping and unmapping disk onto RAM
[snip]
Perhaps one of the more key stepping stones here is execution in place
(XIP) support, which at present works for a particular combination of
embedded architecture, block device and filesystem. Maybe that's the
wrong way of looking at it, and we should consider XIP-for-ramdisk
(rather than ROM/flash).
Anyway, from a mmap() perspective, we'd be logically merging the
filesystem and pagecache layers and losing a layer of physical
indirection.
--
Daniel J Blueman
next reply other threads:[~2008-06-02 18:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-02 18:28 Daniel J Blueman [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-06-02 12:59 Rick van Rein
2008-06-02 17:02 ` david
2008-06-04 1:14 ` Jared Hulbert
2008-06-02 19:30 ` Daniel Barkalow
2008-06-02 20:04 ` Andi Kleen
2008-06-02 21:10 ` Rick van Rein
2008-06-03 0:51 ` Andi Kleen
2008-06-03 14:27 ` Stefan Richter
2008-06-03 16:12 ` Pavel Machek
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=6278d2220806021128h1dd76c16p9ab15142af2fcbdf@mail.gmail.com \
--to=daniel.blueman@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rick@groengemak.nl \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®