From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2002 13:38:54 -0700 From: William Lee Irwin III Subject: Re: memory exhausted Message-ID: <20020427203854.GR26092@holomorphy.com> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020424145006.00b17cb0@notes.tcindex.com> <20020425025753.GJ26092@holomorphy.com> <3CCAFC69.8090306@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Description: brief message Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3CCAFC69.8090306@zytor.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: Rik van Riel , Vivian Wang , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: William Lee Irwin III wrote: >> This is larger than the virtual address space of i386 machines, >> but not larger than the physical address space. In principle, an >> executive taking advantage of 36-bit physical addressing extensions and >> performing its own memory management on the bare metal could perform an >> in-core sort on a 36-bit physical addressing -capable 32-bit machine, >> e.g. i386-style PAE/highmem machines and some 32-bit MIPS machines. A >> kernel module could also in principle take advantage of the kernel's >> low-level memory management facilities to perform such an in-core sort. >> While possible, this is absolutely not recommended. On Sat, Apr 27, 2002 at 12:30:49PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Good God, I hope x86-64 catches on soon and kills off this PAE silliness... > -hpa Taunting me, eh? =) Well, I did say "absolutely not recommended". 64-bit hardware of whatever kind is without question a more appropriate solution to these kinds of issues than such shenanigans anyway, and at this point I'm more or less sorry I brought that up. And I'll leave the discussion of what specific lines of hardware are most suitable for other fora. =) Cheers, Bill -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/