Re: ppc vm

[Mij <mij@bitchx.it>]

It's not too interesting Linus' own opinion
about hardwares.
My question was different.
In PPC, BAT is only a *parallel* eristic cpu
uses trying to get an hit without waiting
for hases full resolution. Now, I'm wondering
how difficult would be building an intel's 2-level
compatibility layer for those drivers which use
such a syscalls.
I noted 2.0 kernel has such a layer, while 2.4
seems not to.

bye

On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 16:56:56 -0500 (EST)
"Albert D. Cahalan" <acahalan@cs.uml.edu> wrote:

> 
> No way. The ppc paging system according to Linus:
> 
> "In particular, while I'm not a big fan of the PPC hash tables
> (understatement of the year), I _do_ like the BAT mapping that PPC has."
> 
> "The others are just stupid aberrations (ie the ppc hash-tables),
> and can portably be considered nothing but in-memory TLB's."
> 
> "The sane PPC setups actually have a regular soft-filled TLB, and last I
> saw that actually performed _better_ than the stupid architected hash-
> chains. And for the broken OS's (ie AIX) that wants the hash-chains, you
> can always make the soft-fill TLB do the stupid thing.."
> 
> 
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-powerpc-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> 
> 


-- 
Mij	-o-	mij@bitchx.it		-o-	http://mij.oltrelinux.com