Re: proxy memory objects patch

[Thomas Bushnell, BSG]

Roland McGrath <roland@frob.com> writes:

> If you can implement the interface that takes many objects and ranges from
> each, please do that.  The reason to want this is so that we can use it to
> compose proxy memory objects that span adjacent memory objects of logically
> contiguous underlying objects like files and disks.  That lets us use the
> new io_map interface that I prefer, and keep the mmap atomic to the user,
> for 64-bit files/devices.  (Remember the RPCs were all updated except for
> io_map, which is still constrained to the first 4G of the file.)

Ooh, that would be nifty too.  

The nice thing here is that with this interface, we can fix it to use
the *right* (but much harder) implementation at any later date.