| To: | linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
|---|---|
| Subject: | module allocation |
| From: | moreau francis <francis_moreau2000@yahoo.fr> |
| Date: | Fri, 28 Apr 2006 13:04:17 +0000 (GMT) |
| Domainkey-signature: | a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.fr; h=Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=jb5UEwLG8jfBFRHJwIwND+VA7e+Bb7vhhQOgBjF7MNzeR45zasrjaTEr6inZB4keQtf4ip6y1TTqe+HRhTHlxiANwo/55FpAUrx9YNSNhPoGnx3ByXFCK4+yFuFBEAB/wKFvLzR0BQen0+5vko9EiX8MUXa5Cov5ieo/Cmr6T3k= ; |
| Original-recipient: | rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
| Reply-to: | moreau francis <francis_moreau2000@yahoo.fr> |
| Sender: | linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org |
Hi
Maybe a silly question...why do we use mapped memory (allocated by
vmalloc) for inserting a module into the kernel ?
I can see only drawbacks:
- It consumes TLB entries,
- When accessing to the module's code, we use TLB entries which can
be bad for interrupt latencies. For instance: if the module has an
interrupt handler and the module's code in still not mapped in the
TLB, we got a page fault...
- Modules are usually loaded at startup, at this time the memory
should not be fragmented.
Thanks
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: trouble on serial console for au1100, Freddy Spierenburg |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Java virtual machine on linux MIPS, Fuxin Zhang |
| Previous by Thread: | problem with mips-linux-gnu-gprof, Krishna |
| Next by Thread: | Re: module allocation, Ralf Baechle |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |