Paging and the Windows CE Paging Pool

MSDN Blog Postings » Paging and the Windows CE Paging Pool

MSDN Blog Postings » Paging and the Windows CE Paging Pool — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 08:58:57 GMT

PingBack from http://msdnrss.thecoderblogs.com/2008/01/20/paging-and-the-windows-ce-paging-pool/

re: Paging and the Windows CE Paging Pool

Alex — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 11:36:15 GMT

Hi Sue,

as always, nice blog entry.

it would be interesting to see a description of using the /SECTION directive to take adventage of SDRAM open-bank policy (I think is also called SDRAM bank interleaving).

Also, the allocation of buffers using the different available APIs (virtualAlloc, AllocPhysMem, BusTransBusAddrxxx,

HalAllocateCommonBuffer, TransBusAddrToStatic, NKCreateStaticMapping/NKDeleteStaticMapping ...), and setting the buffer according to the required alignment (page-aligned, heap-based alignment, stack-based alignment, etc).

Just in case you are running out of topics ;-)

Thanks.

Bye,

Alex

re: Paging and the Windows CE Paging Pool

Dean Ramsier — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 20:11:37 GMT

Excellent!

This seems to come up a lot, and having it completely described like this in one place will be a good resource. Might want to mention the LockPages() API to finish it off...

Dean

re: Paging and the Windows CE Paging Pool

ce_base — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 20:54:34 GMT

Hmm thanks Dean. I should also have talked about how OEMs can tweak their pool / memory usage by moving executables between MODULES and FILES and changing compression / paging settings in the .bib files. Either I'll write up an add-on update to this post, or make a new post and link it to this one. Thanks!

Sue

re: Paging and the Windows CE Paging Pool

jxy1101 — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:28:53 GMT

Sue

how about letting the paging limit can be adjusted dynamically rather than hard-coded by OEMs?

David

re: Paging and the Windows CE Paging Pool

ce_base — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 17:16:22 GMT

We could do that, but how much good would it do? We wouldn't want every application in the world to tweak the paging pool parameters every time they run, nor would application writers want to have to do it. A better scheme, perhaps, would be for each application to be able to optionally report its own desired pool consumption, and let the system decide how much pool to allocate. Better than that would be to have the system dynamically size based on current demand, which is probably what we'd go for in the future.