Re: 64-bit virtual adresses and registers

[Jonathan S. Shapiro]

On Wed, 2007-08-01 at 16:49 -0300, Fortes Marcelo wrote:
> >> I agree with Tanenbaum that if an active program's working set
> >> does not fit in core and must be swapped, there is a problem.
> shap> if you believe that we will remain crippled by 32-bit address
> limits
> shap> forever, then Andy is right. But if you believe that 64-bit
> virtual
> shap> addresses are an inevitable transition (as I do), then I think
> Andy's
> shap> assertion is questionable.
> 64-bit virtual addresses and 64-bit virtual registers can be a
> possible solution to context swtching
> on a multi-server operating system  running on top of a microkernel ?
> There is any literacture about it ?

More bits doesn't eliminate the need to context switching unless you
adopt a "single address space" model. There is lots of work on that. Try
a google search for "SASOS" and/or "single address space operating
system".

Adopting a single address space view is a religious issue.

shap