A cache invalidation bug in Linux memory management

Re:A cache invalidation bug in Linux memory management by chrisseaton on Sunday September 30, 2018 @03:37PM (#18107941)

> 32 bits is suitable for things that can only happen once a frame - (2^32/60) seconds = 2.26 years

What do you mean by a 'frame' and how does 2.26 years relate to a frame?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A cache invalidation bug in Linux memory management by dmoy on Sunday September 30, 2018 @03:45PM (#18107984)

Frame of video at 60fps. For games I suppose that's a benchmark burned into your skull.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A cache invalidation bug in Linux memory management by dvlsg on Monday October 01, 2018 @02:05PM (#18115172)

144 please. :)

For real though, the difference between 60 and 144 is night and day. I can't go back to 60 after playing with 144. I wonder if going beyond 144 would have the same effect.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A cache invalidation bug in Linux memory management by dmoy on Monday October 01, 2018 @11:48PM (#18118676)

Yea but that would require spending more than $600 per 5 years on computer hardware :\

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A cache invalidation bug in Linux memory management by earenndil on Sunday September 30, 2018 @11:03PM (#18109745)

A frame is 1/60 of a second (generally), so if you are indexing your frames with a 32-bit integer, you have enough for 2.26 years of video (or video game, or whatever).

[ Parent | on HN ]