At Sun, 23 Oct 2005 13:25:33 -0400, "Jonathan S. Shapiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sat, 2005-10-22 at 12:39 +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > > That's not a bad counter-example. Except that in the Hurd/L4 design, > > swapping is voluntary and explicit. > > What happens when you run out of physical pages and you want to start a > new process? Given that the vast majority of processes are untrusted, > how to you guarantee that they give up storage?
Well, those are good questions, and we didn't find a satisfactory answer yet. Neal's idea was that the guaranteed physical memory contingent that a process (or user) receives is negotiated in a long-term contract, which periodically must be renegotiated. At renegotiation time, the process gets a chance to swap pages out to disk. After this chance passed, pages may be revoked forcefully. Renegotiation of resources could for example handled with a market-model. Note that these were only very rough ideas. Neal has worked them out in some more detail than I present them here, but we are aware (of at least some) of the problems with these suggestions. Thanks, Marcus _______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
