[openbeos] Re: kernel memory limit

  • From: "Leon Timmermans" <openbeos@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 14:59:46 +0200

Can't this be corrected somewere (is a patch posible)?
Or is PHYS_SIZE hardcoded everywhere.
That would make patching harder, but not imposible.
I never made an VM, but I can imagine we could change the value of PHYS_SIZE
everywhere.
I'm not behind my beos computer, so I can't test this, but if the kernel is
1MB, the chance of a unrelated int32 with exacly the same value is about 25%
By simply using sed, we sould make a kernel with 25% chance of still
functioning as it should, right?
I'm probably very wrong, but it's a nice try.....

Leon Timmermans

----- Original Message -----
From: "François Revol" <revol@xxxxxxx>
To: <openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2003 12:55 PM
Subject: [openbeos] Re: kernel memory limit


> En réponse à Bruno van Dooren <bruno_van_dooren@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> >
> > > No, NewOS doesn't map all available memory - that's a BeOS only
> > > feature, and is responsible for this hard limit; neither NewOS nor
> > > OpenBeOS have it.
> I stand corrected.
>
> >
> > what do you mean by this?
> > i thought memory was allocated on a by-need basis, and that for example
> > all
> > PCI memory is mapped in an unused region > xxx GB.
> >
> > i think i do not understand what you mean by mapping.
> >
> > kind regards,
>
> At boot, the BeOS kernel does the equivalent of:
>
> map_physical_memory("physical_ram", 0, PHYS_SIZE, ...);
>
> So it "wastes" its 2G virtual space by creating an area that is as big
> as the physical RAM...
>
> Just check yourself:
>
> listarea 1 | head -25
>
>
> François.
>
>
>



Other related posts: