Re: 64-bit virtual adresses and registers

"Jonathan S. Shapiro" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.os.hurd.l4
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Wed, 2007-08-01 at 16:49 -0300, Fortes Marcelo wrote:
> >> I agree with Tanenbaum that if an active program's working set
> >> does not fit in core and must be swapped, there is a problem.
> shap> if you believe that we will remain crippled by 32-bit address
> limits
> shap> forever, then Andy is right. But if you believe that 64-bit
> virtual
> shap> addresses are an inevitable transition (as I do), then I think
> Andy's
> shap> assertion is questionable.
> 64-bit virtual addresses and 64-bit virtual registers can be a
> possible solution to context swtching
> on a multi-server operating system  running on top of a microkernel ?
> There is any literacture about it ?

More bits doesn't eliminate the need to context switching unless you
adopt a "single address space" model. There is lots of work on that. Try
a google search for "SASOS" and/or "single address space operating
system".

Adopting a single address space view is a religious issue.

shap
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.