On Wed, 28 Apr 1999, Nate Williams wrote:
> > > : Someone submitted a patch that checked to see if the BIOS returned a
> > > : value > 64M, and if so to 'accept' it's value for the memory, since it's
> > > : more likely to be correct. I'd like to apply it to -current, but I'm
> > > : not sure of the political ramifications....
> > >
> > > I think that it would be OK to do this, especially if you were able to
> > > sanity check the numbers against something else... If it isn't
> > > possible to do a sanity check, then I'd still be tempted to commit it,
> > > making it an option if it causes problems for a significant number (>
> > > 1%) of people.
> >
> > My patch looks like this:
> >
> > Index: machdep.c
> > ===================================================================
> > RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/i386/i386/machdep.c,v
> > retrieving revision 1.330
> > diff -u -r1.330 machdep.c
> > --- machdep.c 1999/04/19 14:14:12 1.330
> > +++ machdep.c 1999/04/26 13:20:30
> > @@ -1403,8 +1403,9 @@
> > }
> > }
> > if (bootinfo.bi_extmem != biosextmem)
> > - printf("BIOS extmem (%uK) != RTC extmem (%uK)\n",
> > + printf("BIOS extmem (%uK) != RTC extmem (%uK), setting
> > to BIOS value\n",
> > bootinfo.bi_extmem, biosextmem);
> > + biosextmem = bootinfo.bi_extmem;
> > }
> >
> > #ifdef SMP
> >
>
> I don't think this is complete, because I think (don't know) that many
> older BIOS's only reported up to 64M of memory, so if you had more than
> 64M in the box it didn't report it.
>
> However, I can't verify this since I don't have any machines with > 64M
> of memory.
I wasn't intending to commit the patch since I don't really understand all
the compatibility problems. I just wanted to be able to read the ACPI
tables on my laptop...
--
Doug Rabson Mail: d...@nlsystems.com
Nonlinear Systems Ltd. Phone: +44 181 442 9037
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
