Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ccut!wnoc-tyo-news!cs.titech!titccy.cc.titech!necom830!mohta From: mohta@necom830.cc.titech.ac.jp (Masataka Ohta) Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals Subject: Re: Fundamental defect of the concept of shared libraries Message-ID: <219@titccy.cc.titech.ac.jp> Date: 21 May 91 15:05:10 GMT References: <213@titccy.cc.titech.ac.jp> <1991May20.090857@wsl.dec.com> <216@titccy.cc.titech.ac.jp> <674816585.AA7847@flaccid> Sender: news@titccy.cc.titech.ac.jp Organization: Tokyo Institute of Technology Lines: 23 In article <674816585.AA7847@flaccid> tonys@pyra.co.uk (Tony Shaughnessy) writes: >>The primary cache of R4000 is virtually indexed and physically tagged. >>That is, it can't map different virtual addresses to a physical address. >I quote from the book "MIPS Risc Architecture" by Gerry Kane, Prentice Hall, >1989, page 4-1. Read the book. It's for R2000/R3000. Even on the page 4-1, the word "R2000" appears six times. But, you are better than others who post based only on their imagination and still require me, who post based on facts such as measurement figures and source code of 4.3BSD, to post based on facts. > "The mapping of these extended, process-unique virtual addresses to > physical addresses need not be one-to-one; virtual addresses of two > or more different processes may map to the same physical address." Compared to R4000, R2000/R3000 are slower CPUs. Masataka Ohta