From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 14 May 2001 20:25:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 14 May 2001 20:25:30 -0400 Received: from neon-gw.transmeta.com ([209.10.217.66]:38668 "EHLO neon-gw.transmeta.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 14 May 2001 20:25:27 -0400 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: 2.4.4 kernel reports wrong amount of physical memory Date: 14 May 2001 17:25:18 -0700 Organization: Transmeta Corporation, Santa Clara CA Message-ID: <9dpt1e$185$1@cesium.transmeta.com> In-Reply-To: <200105142250.f4EMoHt02203@adsl-209-76-109-63.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Disclaimer: Not speaking for Transmeta in any way, shape, or form. Copyright: Copyright 2001 H. Peter Anvin - All Rights Reserved Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Followup to: By author: Rik van Riel In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > On Mon, 14 May 2001, Wayne Whitney wrote: > > In mailing-lists.linux-kernel, you wrote: > > > > > You need to compile highmem support into the kernel if you want to > > > use more than 890 MB of RAM, set it to maximum 4GB for best > > > performance... > > > > On a similar note, what is the maximum physical memory supported > > by the 4GB option? > > Ummm, 4GB maybe? ;) > It seems obvious once you know why the limits are there. The 1 GB limit (actually 1024-128 MB = 896 MB) is a software limit; the 4 GB and 64 GB limits are hardware limits and are exact. IMO we should rename the 1 GB option! -hpa -- at work, in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt