|
From: Nicholas N. <nj...@ca...> - 2004-09-02 11:17:01
|
On Thu, 2 Sep 2004, Julian Seward wrote: >>> Let's just forget about big-bang shadow allocation. It causes a whole >>> bunch of problems, we're not using it at the moment, >> >> No -- we are using it at the moment. However, we are not using >> direct-offset shadow addressing (for which big-bang shadow allocation is a >> prerequisite). Sorry if I didn't make this clear, seems like I should >> have been more careful with my terminology in the RFC. > > Uh, ok, this is my sloppy thinking. I meant, we are not using direct- > offset shadow addressing and therefore there is no reason for big-bang > shadow allocation (is there?) Correct. N |