From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933404AbYD1J6p (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Apr 2008 05:58:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1762971AbYD1J6h (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Apr 2008 05:58:37 -0400 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.153]:31812 "EHLO fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1762963AbYD1J6h (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Apr 2008 05:58:37 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=aryr4+dsxtTe25xXQYdQ8a00UAL2ZeqSpLhfK4LvoEinVqEfvdsHWvbvm6GGEDD3I5rDHdjTM4XfQnczDa19JJBH0uymrAzDKRRHgc4tsIwEOsLXYI8uZbBuGisw4triuId4tbRr9h/HlZA3ZlQ3Q8/+HmxwsI5BZoLfwKHFx4E= Message-ID: <48159FC2.8070909@googlemail.com> Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 11:58:26 +0200 From: Gabriel C User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080227) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mika Fischer CC: Yinghai Lu , Andrew Morton , Ingo Molnar , Andi Kleen , "H. Peter Anvin" , LKML , Jesse Barnes , balajirrao@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_32: trim memory by updating e820 v3 References: <200801192045.17291.yinghai.lu@sun.com> <200801202256.48365.yinghai.lu@sun.com> <20080122165125.GA17992@elte.hu> <200801221623.20861.yinghai.lu@sun.com> <20080426035614.a30afb17.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <86802c440804272350y33d69a32o5533dc01dc5a6c96@mail.gmail.com> <48158CF3.60004@zoopnet.de> <86802c440804280209x401fc223w3d272c6c365e58af@mail.gmail.com> <48159C83.2090400@zoopnet.de> In-Reply-To: <48159C83.2090400@zoopnet.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Mika Fischer wrote: > Yinghai Lu schrieb: >>>> you should get >>>>> reg00: base=0x00000000 ( 0MB), size=2048MB: write-back, count=1 >>>>> reg01: base=0x80000000 (2048MB), size=1024MB: write-back, count=1 >>>>> reg02: base=0xbf700000 (3063MB), size= 1MB: uncachable, count=1 >>>>> reg03: base=0xbf800000 (3064MB), size= 8MB: uncachable, count=1 >>>>> reg04: base=0x100000000 (4096MB), size=1024MB: write-back, count=1 >> please check >> http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/28/115 > > OK, this time it worked! > > With mtrr_chunk_size=1g: > reg00: base=0x00000000 ( 0MB), size=2048MB: write-back, count=1 > reg01: base=0x80000000 (2048MB), size=1024MB: write-back, count=1 > reg02: base=0xbf700000 (3063MB), size= 1MB: uncachable, count=1 > reg03: base=0xbf800000 (3064MB), size= 8MB: uncachable, count=1 > reg04: base=0x100000000 (4096MB), size=1024MB: write-back, count=1 > > Without mtrr_chunk_size=1g: > reg00: base=0x00000000 ( 0MB), size=2048MB: write-back, count=1 > reg01: base=0x80000000 (2048MB), size= 512MB: write-back, count=1 > reg02: base=0xa0000000 (2560MB), size= 256MB: write-back, count=1 > reg03: base=0xb0000000 (2816MB), size= 256MB: write-back, count=1 > reg04: base=0xbf700000 (3063MB), size= 1MB: uncachable, count=1 > reg05: base=0xbf800000 (3064MB), size= 8MB: uncachable, count=1 > reg06: base=0x100000000 (4096MB), size=1024MB: write-back, count=1 > > Both seem equivalent and correct. > > There are also no warnings anymore in the dmesg output: > With mtrr_chunk_size=1g: > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=15950 > > Without mtrr_chunk_size=1g: > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=15951 > >> also, can you try 64bit too? > > I'm not sure how to do this. Can I compile it under 32bit Linux? If not that > will be difficult since I don't have space left for a 64bit installation on my > hard-drive. Maybe Gabiel C can test 64bit? Yes sure, done already :) I could test 32/64 bit on this box if needed. > > Regards, > Mika Gabriel