Re: [BK PATCH 2.5] fs/binfmt_aout.c: Use PAGE_ALIGN_LL() on 64-bit values

From: Christoph Hellwig (hch@infradead.org)
Date: Sun Jul 28 2002 - 14:18:22 EST

Next message: Randy.Dunlap: "Re: [PATCH] block/elevator updates + deadline i/o scheduler"
Previous message: root: "Re: [PATCH] agpgart splitup and cleanup for 2.5.25"
In reply to: Anton Altaparmakov: "Re: [BK PATCH 2.5] fs/binfmt_aout.c: Use PAGE_ALIGN_LL() on 64-bit values"
Next in thread: Eric W. Biederman: "Re: [BK PATCH 2.5] fs/binfmt_aout.c: Use PAGE_ALIGN_LL() on 64-bit values"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Sun, Jul 28, 2002 at 07:55:51PM +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> I thought (intel) CPUs did 48-bit addressing? How do we support 32GiB of
> RAM? With pure 32-bit addressing it would be limited to 4GiB only... No?
> (Of course I am probably confusing varius types of addresses...)

P6+ support 36bit _physical_ addressing.

-
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/

Next message: Randy.Dunlap: "Re: [PATCH] block/elevator updates + deadline i/o scheduler"
Previous message: root: "Re: [PATCH] agpgart splitup and cleanup for 2.5.25"
In reply to: Anton Altaparmakov: "Re: [BK PATCH 2.5] fs/binfmt_aout.c: Use PAGE_ALIGN_LL() on 64-bit values"
Next in thread: Eric W. Biederman: "Re: [BK PATCH 2.5] fs/binfmt_aout.c: Use PAGE_ALIGN_LL() on 64-bit values"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jul 30 2002 - 14:00:29 EST