On Wednesday, June 27, 2007 10:02:35 Pim Zandbergen wrote: > Jesse Barnes wrote: > > It looks like end_pfn might be ~0UL now... can you print that out > > in your configuration? > > Er, do you need the value of end_pfn ? > Here's what I changed: > > if ((highest_addr >> PAGE_SHIFT) != end_pfn) { > printk(KERN_WARNING "***************\n"); > printk(KERN_WARNING "**** WARNING: likely BIOS bug\n"); > printk(KERN_WARNING "**** MTRRs don't cover all of " > "memory, trimmed %lu pages\n", end_pfn - > (highest_addr >> PAGE_SHIFT)); > printk(KERN_WARNING "**** end_pfn before = %lu\n", end_pfn); > end_pfn = highest_addr >> PAGE_SHIFT; > printk(KERN_WARNING "**** end_pfn after = %lu\n", end_pfn); > printk(KERN_WARNING "***************\n"); > } > > Here's the result: > *************** > **** WARNING: likely BIOS bug > **** MTRRs don't cover all of memory, trimmed 18446744073709486080 > pages **** end_pfn before = 2293760 > **** end_pfn after = 2359296 > *************** > > Hope that's what you needed.
Yeah, that's what I needed. end_pfn looks ok, but I guess my test is a little too precise. It should be if ((highest_addr >> PAGE_SHIFT) < end_pfn) rather than !=. That should keep it from trying to extend your memory with bogus math. I thought that the two values should always match, but I guess slightly different memory configurations might break that assumption. Thanks, Jesse - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/