At 05:35 PM 3/14/2005, Caitlin Bestler wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: Troy Benjegerdes
[
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, March 14, 2005 5:06 PM
> To: Caitlin Bestler
> Cc: openib-general@openib.org
> Subject: Re: [openib-general] Getting rid of pinned
> -Original Message-
> From: Troy Benjegerdes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, March 14, 2005 5:06 PM
> To: Caitlin Bestler
> Cc: openib-general@openib.org
> Subject: Re: [openib-general] Getting rid of pinned memory requirement
>
> >
> > The
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 04:33:19PM -0800, Caitlin Bestler wrote:
> >
> > While hardware designers may like this idea, I would like to
> > make the point that if you want the application to
> > *absolutely* control the availability of physical memory, you
> > shouldn't be writing userspace appli
>
> While hardware designers may like this idea, I would like to
> make the point that if you want the application to
> *absolutely* control the availability of physical memory, you
> shouldn't be writing userspace applications that run on Linux.
>
This is not just a hardware design issue. It
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 03:29:06PM -0800, Caitlin Bestler wrote:
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Troy
> > Benjegerdes
> > Sent: Monday, March 14, 2005 3:01 PM
> > To: openib-general@openib.org
> > Subject: [openib-genera
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Troy
> Benjegerdes
> Sent: Monday, March 14, 2005 3:01 PM
> To: openib-general@openib.org
> Subject: [openib-general] Getting rid of pinned memory requirement
>
> The current InfiniBand model of us
