[coyotos-dev] PinSets

Jonathan S. Shapiro shap at eros-os.org
Sun Jan 15 13:27:58 EST 2006


On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 19:06 +0100, Matthieu Lemerre wrote:
> What would be the form of the constraint?  Would it be a simple couple
> (address_min, adress_max), or a more complicated scheme?
> 
> Neal originally wanted to express constraints on physical memory
> location by using two words :
> 
> - bits in the first word will indicate bits which have to be on in the
> address of the physical memory eventually choosen
> 
> - bits on in the second word will indicate bits which have to be off in
>  the address of the physical memory eventually choosen

Not yet decided. I haven't thought Neal's proposal through, but my
initial thought is that matters are a little more complicated than this.

There are really two constraints to consider:

1. The constraint imposed by the pinset. This is a constraint specified
to the pinset admission control agent so that it can ensure that the
requested limit can be satisfied.

The problem here is that computing a simultaneous satisfaction for many
pinsets is probably easier if the constraint is specified as a (base,
bound, rounding alignment) tuple. The problem that needs to be solved
here is similar to admission control in real-time scheduling.

2. The constraint provided at runtime by the requesting process. This is
a placement preference. Neal's solution would be okay here, but it may
not be ideal given the pre-existing constraint. Once you already know
that you are in a given range, it might be that a modular offset is
sufficient.

I'll talk to Neal to learn what he was trying to accomplish. I'm not
committed to the particular constraint approach that I am proposing. I'm
only committed to the idea that the admission control agent needs to be
able to make sure that all outstanding pinset constraints can be
simultaneously satisfied.

shap



More information about the coyotos-dev mailing list