Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 15:14:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 15:14:47 -0400 Received: from mhw.ulib.iupui.edu ([134.68.164.123]:12483 "EHLO mhw.ULib.IUPUI.Edu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 15:14:37 -0400 Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 14:14:38 -0500 (EST) From: "Mark H. Wood" X-X-Sender: cc: Subject: Re: What is the truth about Linux 2.4's RAM limitations? In-Reply-To: <200107101838.NAA23636@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII To: unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header on input)@localhost.localdomain Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 10 Jul 2001, Jesse Pollard wrote: > "Richard B. Johnson" [snip] > > Unlike some OS (like VMS), a context-switch does not occur > > when the kernel provides services for the calling task. > > Therefore, it was most reasonable to have the kernel exist within > > each tasks address space. With modern processors, it doesn't make > > very much difference, you could have user space start at virtual > > address 0 and extend to virtual address 0xffffffff. However, this would > > not be Unix. It would also force the kernel to use additional > > CPU cycles when addressing a tasks virtual address space, > > i.e., when data are copied to/from user to kernel space. > > I believe the VAX/VMS implementation shared OS and user space: > > p0 - user application 0 > p1 - system shared libraries 0x3fffffff > p2 - kernel 0x7fffffff > rest was I/O, cache memory 0xffffffff > > It was a hardware design, not a function of the software. Correct, except that "p2" is called S0. IIRC it is the top quarter of the address space, and there's a reserved S1 region. The command interpreter is also mapped into P2. The very top of memory is reserved for device registers. > UNIX origins were on a PDP-11. there were two sets of addressing registers > 1 kernel, 1 user (except on 11/45 - 1 kernel, 1 user, 1 "executive" > (never used except in some really strange form of extented shared library) Early '11s didn't have the Ispace/Dspace split. My PDP11 databook is at home, and I don't trust my memory far enough to say which model introduced the split. My recollection is that the earliest implementation was an add-on board which monitored the Unibus address lines and fired interrupts when it thought its programmed memory access rules were violated. -- Mark H. Wood, Lead System Programmer mwood@IUPUI.Edu Make a good day. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/