At 10/20/2012 02:11 AM, KOSAKI Motohiro Wrote: > On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 6:16 AM, <we...@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote: >> From: Wen Congyang <we...@cn.fujitsu.com> >> >> Current mem= implementation seems buggy because specification and >> implementation doesn't match. Current mem= has been working >> for many years and it's not buggy, it works as expected. So >> we should update the specification. >> >> Signed-off-by: Wen Congyang <we...@cn.fujitsu.com> >> Sort-of-tentatively-acked-by: Rob Landley <r...@landley.net> >> --- >> Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt | 7 ++++--- >> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt >> b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt >> index 9776f06..85b911a 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt >> +++ b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt >> @@ -1481,9 +1481,10 @@ bytes respectively. Such letter suffixes can also be >> entirely omitted. >> mem=nn[KMG] [KNL,BOOT] Force usage of a specific amount of memory >> Amount of memory to be used when the kernel is not >> able >> to see the whole system memory or for test. >> - [X86-32] Use together with memmap= to avoid physical >> - address space collisions. Without memmap= PCI devices >> - could be placed at addresses belonging to unused RAM. >> + [X86-32] Work as limiting max address. Use together >> + with memmap= to avoid physical address space >> collisions. >> + Without memmap= PCI devices could be placed at >> addresses >> + belonging to unused RAM. > > If my remember is correct, x86-64 also specify maximum address. > but my remember is not clear. >
Do you mean max_addr option? It is only for ia64 box. Thanks Wen Congyang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
