Re: Linux and lots of memory: documentation?

Kurt Garloff (garloff@kg1.ping.de)
Fri, 18 Dec 1998 22:13:50 +0100


On Fri, Dec 18, 1998 at 08:19:24PM +0000, Riley Williams wrote:
> Hi Kurt.
>
> > Well, you don't need to understand the ld script. Just look out for
> > the constant 0xc0000000 and replace it with the value you chose.
> > Hint: It's in line 9 and just gives the starting address of the
> > kernel.
>
> Hint: My patch does NOT use ONE FIXED VALUE as you appear to have
> assumed, but a value selected by running whichever config script you
> prefer...

Sorry, I didn't have a look at your patch. I just saw you complaining about
the ld scripting language and I told you you don't need to get full
understanding of it in order to accomplish your goal. I still hold that.

> > My kernels have 0x7000000 since a couple of months and it works
> > fine. I only have 128MB, though ...
>
> I only have 128M myself, and can't test the changes easily as a
> result. That's why I only posted the script "for testing" to the
> linux-kernel mailing list, not as a proven patch that can definately
> be inserted in the kernel.

The changes I proposed some weeks ago as a patch which could go into the
kernel have proven to work on quite some people machines. (And it once was a
config option and also worked fine. It was removed because too many people
had the idea of limiting the amount of supported RAM to 64MB and the like.)
As others pointed out: There is a disadvantage though: The limiting of the
per process virtual memory. I was not aware of processes that need more than
2MB of virtual mem, but people told me there are. And there's no easy way
out ...

> I will also add that of the dozen or so replies I've received so far,
> yours is the ONLY one stating that a patch such as mine can't possibly
> work, and some of the ones stating that it can work with a little more
> polishing are people whose programming abilities I rate highly, so I'm
> afriad I have to assume that you're talking about something you know
> little (if anything) about, and rate your comments accordingly...

Sorry, I don't know what you refer to and it's hard not to feel insulted by
what you are saying. I never said anything like your patch will not work. I
also didn't mean it, as like said above, I even didn't have a look at your
patch. I don't know how you come to the idea of me having said such.
And while I don't claim to be the most competent VM hacker, I still
understand why the linker needs to know the kernel addresses at link time.
(But that's another story.) But feel free to ask the experts!

Happy hacking!

-- 
Kurt Garloff <K.Garloff@ping.de>  (Dortmund, FRG)
PGP key on http://student.physik.uni-dortmund.de/homepages/garloff

- 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/