On 5 Mar 2003 07:04:51 -0800
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
| Followup to: <32981.4.64.238.61.1046844111.squirrel@www.osdl.org>
| By author: "Randy.Dunlap" <rddunlap@osdl.org>
| In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
| >
| > OK, with feeling:
| >
| > I agree with you since the boot protocol is well-defined.
| >
| > Just to be clear, my comment was referring to
| > Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt, not to any C code.
| >
| > And it would really be helpful to catch issues like this soon
| > after they happen...
| >
|
| Unfortunately last time I commented on this the response was roughly
| "well, the patch already made it into Linus' kernel, it's too late to
| fix it now." That isn't exactly a very helpful response.
I don't see why it's too late. How can it be too late?
Ah, because it's already made it into 2.4?
| The mem= parameter has the semantic in the i386/PC boot protocol that
| it specifies the top address of the usable memory region that begins
| at 0x100000. It's a bit of a wart that the boot loaders have to be
| aware of this, but it's so and it's been so for a very long time.
So it's the top of the 0x100000-mem physical linear memory region
(i.e., no gaps)?
-- ~Randy - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 07 2003 - 22:00:28 EST