[MLton] Progress on AMD64/FreeBSD
Jesper Louis Andersen
jesper.louis.andersen at gmail.com
Sun Jun 24 02:05:09 PDT 2007
Matthew is right, it doesn't cycle. I came to the same conclusion
of him. What nags me however is that since we are not doing MAP_FIXED the
location is a hint to the kernel. In principle the kernel is free to provide
any memory area where it can fit the mapping.
I hope to get some time for investigating the coming days. There are a
rather loose ends to verify.
On 6/24/07, skaller <skaller at users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-06-23 at 19:57 -0500, Matthew Fluet wrote:
> > Jesper Louis Andersen wrote:
> > > ok, new hypothesis:
> > >
> > > printing the right size of the pointer gives
> > >
> > > Couldn't map f7ff9954b0000000, 94208
> > >
> > > etc. So I think this area is non-mappable for som reason. More
> > > investigation
> > > needed.
> > It could be that FreeBSD just doesn't release the very high addresses
> > for mmap'ing. And it is just taking forever to work our way down to the
> > available addresses.
> > We'll want to increase the scan stride for a 64-bit system.
> I think on Linux, the whole upper half of the address space is reserved
> for the kernel. [Still .. Mlton does work 64 bit on Ubuntu]
> There are descriptions of the memory models somewhere.
> To me this number: f7ff9954b0000000 looks like a stack address.
> I don't really have any expertise though.
> John Skaller <skaller at users dot sf dot net>
> Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the MLton