concurrent VM subsystems

concurrent VM subsystems

Post by Luigi Genon » Fri, 26 Oct 2001 22:10:08



This proposal came out two or three times.
Alan said "too ugly for words".

But the point is that when you are managing a complex project like the
Linux Kernel, you have to make choices, the VM is one of the think
that the tree manteiner has to make a choice about.

Two VM for the same kernel is nonsense, also as a configuration option.

In fact, here is the difference beetwen a coordinate and managed project,
and the "lets' put all inside" approach.

That said.
Those two VM are good, but for different use, and different HW.
It is a choice also which main use the kernel should address as a target.

I already exposed my opinion, and both Andrea and Rik know it very well.
The VM for servers needs to be predictable, for desktops needs to be as
fast as possible, also if it is a little less predictable and stable (who
cares if you reboot you desktop once every two days?).

Linus and Alan do chice for their tree what they want to get as a target,
and which VM approach they want to develop.

To have competition this way is also good, because there can also be
cooperation and compenetration.

Two VM as optional choice for one kernel is a bad approach, and is not
metodologically correct. (as a paradox, so let's have two VFS, two network
layers...)

Luigi


> Just an idea from an absolute layman who keeps
> an eye on Kernel Traffic:

> Isn't it possible to include both VM approaches in the
> kernel sources? It would be nice to be able to choose
> at compile time through a configuration option.
> Perhaps Andrea Arcangeli's version could be marked
> experimental.

> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
 
 
 

concurrent VM subsystems

Post by CaT » Fri, 26 Oct 2001 23:40:08



> I already exposed my opinion, and both Andrea and Rik know it very well.
> The VM for servers needs to be predictable, for desktops needs to be as
> fast as possible, also if it is a little less predictable and stable (who
> cares if you reboot you desktop once every two days?).

It doesn't matter if it's every 2 days or 2 years if it does it just
when you're doing something that must NOT be interrupted and you lose
a buttload of work. Stability is important in both a server AND desktop
environment.

--
CaT        "As you can expect it's really affecting my sex life. I can't help
           it. Each time my wife initiates sex, these ejaculating hippos keep
           floating through my mind."
                - Mohd. Binatang bin Goncang, Singapore Zoological Gardens
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

 
 
 

1. 2.4.9 VM/VMA subsystem works much better

Everyone,

        Just a note: the VMA sanity patch which went in to 2.4.9
has improved Mozilla's performance considerably. I did a rough
calculation based on startup time and found that Mozilla started
approximately 10%-12% faster on 2.4.9 then 2.4.8. Plus, I've
found that swapping is actually starting to work again, although
it still tends to stick at certain times.

        Great job everyone.

Brad

=====
Brad Chapman




__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

2. DNS

3. Looking for papers about internals of the SunOS VM subsystem

4. Processing cursor keys (HOW TO UNDER UNIX on PC)

5. Looking for VMS Patch and VMS ARC

6. The UKs Top Software R & D Opportunities - ECM

7. Veritas VM vs Sun VM

8. infecting linux???

9. VM / OOM troubles in 2.4.20-ck4 (-aa VM)

10. LINUX VM (2.4.14) vs FreeBSD VM in low memory machines

11. vm rewrite ready [Re: broken VM in 2.4.10-pre9]

12. VM / OOM troubles in 2.4.20-ck4 (-aa VM)

13. VMS as a career move ( was Re: HP admits it will kill VMS if merger suceeds)