On Saturday 05 November 2005 06:45, Jeff Dike wrote:
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 02:41:11PM -0600, Rob Landley wrote:
On Friday 04 November 2005 13:10, Blaisorblade wrote:
What I was thinking is that if we get prezeroing infrastructure that
can use various prezeroing accelerators (as has
On Saturday 05 November 2005 02:00, Rob Landley wrote:
It's not on the networking page, or in the howto, it's not in the kernel
tarball, and the download page just links to
http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/networking.html#switch
[...]
I guess that yep, the web-pages are totally as-is,
On Friday 04 November 2005 23:45, Jeff Dike wrote:
If we get prezeroing, the tunable is useful. If we haven't got
prezeroing, this infrastructure probably won't get in.
I'm not really convinced that prezeroing would be that useful, particularly
through madvise. The reason is that the
On Friday 04 November 2005 23:16, Jeff Dike wrote:
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 07:00:37PM -0600, Rob Landley wrote:
Let's see, the uml_net link from the download page (the difference
between that and uml_switch is...?) links to a generic page about CVS,
which isn't installed on my laptop.
On Saturday 05 November 2005 05:30, Blaisorblade wrote:
I've proposed in fact including (for now) another of Con's patch, which
gives some preference to free memory over pagecache (to speed up page
allocation)... but I don't quite understand why no Con's patches get
merged, at least in -mm
On Friday 04 November 2005 23:16, Jeff Dike wrote:
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 07:00:37PM -0600, Rob Landley wrote:
Let's see, the uml_net link from the download page (the difference
between that and uml_switch is...?) links to a generic page about CVS,
which isn't installed on my laptop.
