On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Tigran Aivazian wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > > Could you send me the backtrace of one of the cases where
> > > you hit the bug ?
>
> just to add -- I was following Alan Cox's suggestion of
> incrementing "mem=N" and finding the value where the system
> stops working normally. It was ok as high as "mem=3096M" but
> then I realized that I was also using Zoltan's big-mtrr patch at
> the same time so I will retest the whole thing without it...
> tomorrow.
>
> Just to clarify - the problem _does_ show up without Zoltan's
> patch but my "mem=N" tests were done with it so those findings
> are not really proving much. I need to redo them with vanilla
> kernel.
Interesting, so up to 3GB works just fine with the new
VM and above that you can trigger all kinds of funny
errors ?
Could it be that the kernel fills most of low memory
with kernel data structures to manage high memory, so
that it doesn't have enough low memory left to do the
bookkeeping for the eepro card, etc???
regards,
Rik
--
"What you're running that piece of shit Gnome?!?!"
-- Miguel de Icaza, UKUUG 2000
http://www.conectiva.com/ http://www.surriel.com/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Oct 15 2000 - 21:00:19 EST