[H-GEN] A problem...

David Jericho davidj at meesha.humbug.org.au
Thu May 14 00:24:45 EDT 1998


On Thu, May 14, 1998 at 04:59:38AM +1000, Byron Ellacott wrote:
> On Thu, May 14, 1998 at 01:08:27AM +1000, Robert Brockway wrote:
> > a)  Return the pa2012 and go for an inferior TX based m/b (TX can only
> >     cache 64Mb afaiK). [HX based boards don't support sdram].
> note, here, the TX can only cache the first 64mb, but can support much more.  Now, it
> may seem wasteful to have the remaining memory uncached, but given that uncached
> memory is still a hell of a lot faster than a harddrive swap file, I don't see this
> as such a huge problem.  Hopefully most programs will reside in the lower 64mb
> anyway. :)

And this is why it's a general consensus amongst the linux kernel coding
community to make the last how'ever megs of memory on a TX a ramdrive, which
you swap into. It seems that things run quite nicely when you do that
especially in the given case of having SDRAM.


-- 
David "Figure the reason out yourself" Jericho
	Remember, delegate, pass the blame and take the fame...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 366 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.humbug.org.au/pipermail/general/attachments/19980514/96135ed3/attachment.sig>


More information about the General mailing list