Re: Memory being incorrected sized at boot-up
david parsons (o.r.c@p.e.l.l.p.o.r.t.l.a.n.d.o.r.u.s)
15 Jul 1997 02:29:17 -0700
In article <linux.kernel.19970715103725.60518@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>,
Martin Mares <mj@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> > OK, I incorrectly assumed we call the old function first and continue
>> >with the new one only if it reports 64M...
>>
>> That's what I did in 2.0.30, unfortuantely BIOS on Compaq's only
>> reports a maximum of 16MB wiht the old BIOS call.
>
> Maybe call the new one for >=16MB? This will reduce the chance of crash
>on a mis-behaved BIOS to minimum. If such broken BIOS'es exist, they are
>probably on the 386's and most 386 machines have probably <16MB RAM.
Might it be a good idea to see if there are any old bioses out there
that DO fail before embarking on some byzantine patch to deal with
them? I know that the patch I put into the 2.1 kernels works on
some positively ancient 386sx AMI and Phoenix bioses, as well as the
usual bizarre outcroppings you find on old Compaq and IBM
motherboards.
____
david parsons \bi/ Utterly confused by this discussion.
\/