From: cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net
In article ,
James Harris wrote:
>On 13/12/2023 15:29, Dan Cross wrote:
>> In article ,
>> James Harris wrote:
>>> On 23/03/2023 19:49, Dan Cross wrote:
>>>> In article ,
>>>> Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>>>> cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) writes:
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>>>>> It was never clear to me
>>>>>> how a hypervisor could, in general, know the format of the guest
>>>>>> page tables. I know the Disco folks had to make some changes to
>>>>>> Irix to get it to work.
>>>>>
>>>>> When I was working on IRIX, I was not fond of either the software
>>>>> managed TLB, coloring or the Kseg stuff; the MIPS project I worked on
was called
>>>>> Teak and was a distributed version of Irix (eventually cancelled)
>>>>> for networks of R10k boxes.
>>>>
>>>> I get it from a hardware perspective: fewer transistors with a
>>>> software-managed TLB, but man...so many drawbacks.
>>>
>>> Handling a software-managed TLB may be more work, in a sense, but it
>>> gives an OS developer more control, more feedback, more freedom, and
>>> perhaps better opportunities for performance gains - as long as the TLB
>>> is large enough.
>>
>> Citation needed.
>>
>>> Having the hardware carry out a walk of page tables (the only option if
>>> the TLB can is updated by hardware) has long seemed to me like a bad
>>> idea, and it doesn't scale very well as addresses get wider.
>>
>> This seems like a claim that isn't going to stand up to close
>> scrutiny, let alone evidence.
>
>Is any of that not covered in the reply I've just made to Scott?
Well, you posted no citations and no real evidence though you
did make a lot of claims.
- Dan C.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
