Article View: comp.arch
Article #22932Re: virtual memory
From: blmblm
Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 18:29
Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 18:29
41 lines
2949 bytes
2949 bytes
In article <m3y7x6j3wj.fsf@lhwlinux.garlic.com>, Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> wrote: [ snip ] >SVS evolved into MVS ... there was a separate address space for every >application. However, because of the heavy pointer passing paradigm, >the "MVS" kernel actually occupied 8mbytes of every application >16mbyte virtual address space. There was some additional hacks >required. There were some number of things called subsystems that were >part of most operational environments. They existed outside of the >kernel (in their own virtual address space) ... but in the MVT & SVS >worlds, other applications were in the habit of directly calling these >subsystem functions using pointer passing paradigm ... which required >the subsystems (which now were in separate address space) to directly >access the calling application's parameters in the application's >virtual address space. > >The initial solution was something called a "COMMON" segment, a (again >initially) 1mbyte area of every virtual address space where >applications could stuff parameter values that they needed to be >accessed by called subsystems, resident in other address spaces. Over >time, as customer installations added a large variety of subsystems, >it was unusual to find the COMMON segment taking up five megabytes. >While these were MVS systems, with a unique 16mbyte virtual address >space for every application, the kernel image was taking 8mbytes out >of every virtual address space, and with a five megabyte COMMON area, >that would leave a maximum of 3mbytes for application use (out of a >16mbyte virtual address space). (Just now working my way through this thread; great stuff .... ) Was there an acronym/initialism for this COMMON area? My memory of doing junior-level systems work on MVS systems is telling me that there was one, but not what. ? [ snip ] -- B. L. Massingill ObDisclaimer: I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<4dh2kcF1aar1vU3@individual.net>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!news2.volia.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mailReferences:
<1147168912.656721.71000@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1147409433.310823.22720@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1147467379.996805.42050@j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <m3y7x6j3wj.fsf@lhwlinux.garlic.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Thread: 102b75,1231859970eae518 X-Google-Thread: fd705,2622651c2dd46327 X-Google-Thread: 103c88,b76213622410bb41 X-Google-Attributes: gid102b75,gidfd705,gid103c88,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!news2.volia.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm@myrealbox.com> Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers,bit.listserv.vmesa-l Subject: Re: virtual memory Date: 23 May 2006 18:29:33 GMT Organization: None Lines: 41 Message-ID: <4dh2kcF1aar1vU3@individual.net> References: <1147168912.656721.71000@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1147409433.310823.22720@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1147467379.996805.42050@j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <m3y7x6j3wj.fsf@lhwlinux.garlic.com> X-Trace: individual.net 1FCxV4FHy7qtE7aGbbbwYQR4PV7Xt+rf2+D69afOm/0NCl7R7d X-Orig-Path: not-for-mail X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test76 (Apr 2, 2001)