Re: Breaking the 64MB barrier
H. Peter Anvin (hpa@transmeta.com)
16 Oct 1998 15:33:03 GMT
Followup to: <Pine.LNX.3.96.981015173635.21405A-100000@earth.terran.org>
By author: "B. James Phillippe" <bryan@terran.org>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> Greetings,
>
> I am aware that passing the "mem=XX" option in LILO overcomes this
> problem; this is irrelevant because it has nothing to do with what I'm
> about to ask (for you rapid-reply "RTFM" people).
>
> The question is this: I had a debate with someone about the 64MB+
> memory issue with Linux. Their position is that it's a bug in the kernel,
> and mine was that it was an x86 BIOS limitation. I have two questions:
> 1.) who's right? 2.) How is it that Microsoft is able to deal with this
> without a bootloader option, and we can't? Seems this is a sizeable flaw
> (regardless of the cause) for systems where the memory amount may be
> changed dynamically. If this is indeed a kernel limitation, what would be
> required to get past it?
>
This problem is fixed in 2.1 and late 2.0 kernels.
-hpa
--
PGP: 2047/2A960705 BA 03 D3 2C 14 A8 A8 BD 1E DF FE 69 EE 35 BD 74
See http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/ for web page and full PGP public key
I am Bahá'í -- ask me about it or see http://www.bahai.org/
"To love another person is to see the face of God." -- Les Misérables
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/