On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 19:41:36 +0100 (BST) 
 Steve Woodford <steve@mctavish.demon.co.uk> wrote:

 > It seems someone beat me to it. Looking at mvme68k's machdep.c, it already
 > has two segments, 0==onboard memory, 1==VMEbus memory. Would I be right to
 > assume UVM treats segment 0 as higher priority than segment 1?

Yup, cool.  I guess I must have done that when I added the support to UVM
in the first place.

        -- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@nas.nasa.gov>