etep

13 ms·

91.
by etep 12y ago
Should be running out of energy.
92.
by etep 12y ago
Inspirational.
93.
by etep 13y ago
If the real issue is simply to minimize the number of pages to track (and thereby maximize TLB hits) then its very simple: go to 1 GB (or higher!) pages. This hints that there is a tradeoff happening here. At the highest level, the tradeoff
94.
by etep 13y ago
Both would be best, but they are actually independent.
95.
by etep 13y ago
Hardware support for virtualization is actually one of the main things driving huge pages. For a TLB miss in a guest, you end up doing a nested page table walk. This is much more expensive with 4 KB pages (i.e. as opposed to 2 MB). Short an
96.
by etep 13y ago
I think it is much simpler. 4 KB pages are small today, and 1 GB is still very large for most processes. 2 MB sounds about right (gut check, how much memory does the average process allocate, and for those small processes, is 2 MB that muc
97.
by etep 13y ago
Paging is not fast, period. I think it's a reasonable assumption that the machine is not paging. That said, if you rely on paging, then your comment holds.
98.
by etep 13y ago
why brew in favor of port (macports)? any particular reason -- just curious.
99.
by etep 13y ago
inefficiency can infer
100.
by etep 13y ago
Because binary allows for exact copies. Imagine copying a cassette tape or VHS and then copying from the copy. Eventually you have noise. Same for photocopies, and obviously all of these are somewhat dated. This property of noise reject