Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754648AbYFBRCL (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jun 2008 13:02:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752822AbYFBRB5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jun 2008 13:01:57 -0400 Received: from mail.lang.hm ([64.81.33.126]:59137 "EHLO bifrost.lang.hm" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752456AbYFBRB5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jun 2008 13:01:57 -0400 Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 10:02:13 -0700 (PDT) From: david@lang.hm X-X-Sender: dlang@asgard.lang.hm To: Rick van Rein cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Future Linux on Bistable Storage In-Reply-To: <20080602125904.GA15129@phantom.vanrein.org> Message-ID: References: <20080602125904.GA15129@phantom.vanrein.org> User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1004 Lines: 23 On Mon, 2 Jun 2008, Rick van Rein 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. unless there has been a breakthrough that I haven't heard about (always possible) I seriously doubt that this is the case. the alternate technologies that I have heard about are either _far_ less dense then DRAM (similar to static ram) or require erasing in blocks (similar to flash). niether one is appropriate for a large, flat addressed memory architecture as you list below. David Lang -- 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/