[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200610171058.k9HAwUIo003086@laptop13.inf.utfsm.cl>
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 07:58:30 -0300
From: "Horst H. von Brand" <vonbrand@....utfsm.cl>
To: mfbaustx <mfbaustx@...il.com>
cc: "Oliver Neukum" <oliver@...kum.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: copy_from_user / copy_to_user with no swap space
mfbaustx <mfbaustx@...il.com> wrote:
> >>> No. Your code may be only partially paged into RAM.
> >>> The same can happen for any mmaped data.
> That's what I thought I read. But then my question is: with
> on-demand paging, is it possible to have two processes partially
> paged?
Why shouldn't they be? The whole idea is having just /parts/ (hopefully the
ones in active use) in memory.
> Surely, it MUST be the case that any processes with
> overlapping logical address spaces must be paged coherently.
I don't know what this is supposed to mean...
> So,
> while on-demand "paging-in" allows for partial paging of a process,
> is it the case that, on a context switch, the user-space PTE's are
> completely erased (so that you get page-faults and can then on-demand
> page them in...)?
Each process has its own page tables, they don't get in each others
hair. And the page tables precisely manage making several processes get
access to the /same/ logical addresses, but at /different/ physical
addresses.
--
Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org
Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 2654431
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 2654239
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 2797513
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists