linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LTP testing (shmat01)

To: Carsten Langgaard <carstenl@mips.com>
Subject: Re: LTP testing (shmat01)
From: Ralf Baechle <ralf@oss.sgi.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 21:56:14 +0200
Cc: linux-mips@oss.sgi.com
In-reply-to: <3D249181.D9147AAE@mips.com>; from carstenl@mips.com on Thu, Jul 04, 2002 at 08:18:41PM +0200
References: <3D246924.542682B2@mips.com> <20020704193414.A29570@dea.linux-mips.net> <3D249181.D9147AAE@mips.com>
Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i
On Thu, Jul 04, 2002 at 08:18:41PM +0200, Carsten Langgaard wrote:

> > any power of 2 > PAGE_SIZE.
> 
> Ok, I see, but is there any reason for us to be different than the
> rest of the world ?

Imho the your question already wrong :-)  Any assumption about the
constant's value in a piece of code is wrong.

The reason why the constant's value was choosen are virtually indexed
caches.  The value allows attaching of shared memory segment without
any cache flushes.

Other architectures also use different values from PAGE_SIZE like IA64 1MB,
SH 16kB and Sparc not even a constant value accross all architectures
variants, so unlike what your posting implicates we're not that unusual.

  Ralf


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>