Wouter, Please explain your concern. I don't see how an MMU makes a difference.
John From: oswg at openinterconnect.org [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Wouter van der Beek (wovander) Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 8:45 AM To: Light, John J; iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org; oswg at openinterconnect.org Subject: [oswg] RE: memory management in IoTivity Hi John, Are these stacks run on CPUs without an MMU? Kind Regards, Wouter From: oswg at openinterconnect.org<mailto:oswg at openinterconnect.org> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Light, John J Sent: 20 November 2015 20:58 To: iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org<mailto:iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org>; oswg at openinterconnect.org<mailto:oswg at openinterconnect.org> Subject: [oswg] memory management in IoTivity 1. I submitted JIRA issue IOT-841<https://jira.iotivity.org/browse/IOT-841> today. It describes a serious medium-term problem for IoTivity that will be a major problem as we move forward. Today, no IoTivity server has run a long time in a rich usage environment. As IoTivity devices are deployed, they will fail due to memory fragmentation of their heaps, and we won't know why they failed. We will shrug our shoulders and restart them successfully. This is no way to run an IoT world. The JIRA issue points to three IoTivity Wiki arcticles I contributed on this subject: memory_management_design<https://wiki.iotivity.org/memory_management_design> memory_management_design_ii<https://wiki.iotivity.org/memory_management_design_ii> memory_management_design_iii<https://wiki.iotivity.org/memory_management_design_iii> Enjoy. John Light Intel OTC OIC development -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.iotivity.org/pipermail/iotivity-dev/attachments/20151123/1ffe8357/attachment.html>
