Re: Re: Debian BSD.. cool idea
On Mon, Jan 31, 2000 at 07:49:22PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> > > Anyways, given this supposedly wonderful support for linux binaries,
> > > perhaps it could be built into something stable enough to support
> > > multiple bsd kernel versions?
> > What is "it"? I'm not too sure what you are referring to.
> "it" refers to the previous noun clause. In this case that would be this
> "supposedly wonderful support for linux binaries".
Are you suggesting to use the linux compatiblity mode to make mismatched
worlds and kernels less of a problem? I'm not seeing the logic in that.
> I believe this is false as of Linux 2.2. I seem to recall Stephen
> Tweedie spending some significant time tuning this aspect of the system
> prior to the release of 2.2.
> The basic strategy is to swap aged pages out, but leave enough information
> behind such that if that page is hit before the underlying memory is
> reused it can be trivially made available again.
How trivially can it be made available? Isn't it more logical to not
touch the page in physical and only swap a copy of it out, then when
another page wants physical you can quickly kill the original?
> [Disclaimer: There *are* problems with Linux -- there are significant
> subsystems which need to be re-engineered and rewritten. Disclamer
> on disclaimer: However, I see those as subsystem issues rather than
> architectural issues. Disclaimer on disclaimer on disclaimer: The
> closest thing to an architectural issue that's been pointed out to
> me is that Linux doesn't follow the BSD architecture. Disclaimer on
> disclaimer on disclaimer on disclaimer: but that's simply an observation
> of a difference, not a fundamental flaw.]
The big question is, how much work needs to be put in, and could it be
spent in other places more wisely?