Pagination in Windows XP. Why not paginated segmentation? RRS feed

  • Question

  • Good morning:

    I'm studying x86 hardware and xp operative system in order to know the working principles under which they run.

    I'm higtly surprised to see that Intel x86 procesors have three segment registers: CS, DS and SS which are supossed to aim at code, data and stack segments. I've also seen in several books that xp uses pagination memory management (the authors don't specify if its multiple pagination or simple).

    I wonder why to have these segment pointers and don't use them. Wouldn't it be more logical to use paginated segmentation?.

    Thank you in advance


    Buenas noches:

    Estoy estudiando el hardware x86 y el sistema operativo windows xp para conocer las bases de su funcionamiento.

    Me choca tremendamente que en los procesadores Intel x86 existan tres registros CS, DS y SS para apuntar a segmentos de código, datos y pila y que hasta donde he podido ver en varios libros, el sistema de gestión de memoria empleado por windows xp sea paginación en lugar de segmentación paginada, que es mucho mejor.

    ¿Cuál es la razón?. ¿Para qué existen los tres registros CS, DS y SS?.

    Un saludo

    Sunday, October 31, 2010 9:11 AM


  • The references are buried deep in MSDN where I have noticed several documents on Windows memory use. Its targeted for C++ developers.

    XP can use up to 2 GB easily, and all programs share the 2GB area.

    Its probably time to get a new machine, Windows 7 is much better and with new 64-bit processors, huge amounts of RAM are possible to extreme needs.

    Elected! Your votes and support have got me my 2010 MVP!

    Developer | Windows IT | Chess | Economics | Hardcore Games | Vegan Advocate | PC Reviews

    • Marked as answer by Gabrach Sunday, October 31, 2010 9:18 PM
    Sunday, October 31, 2010 7:36 PM