Messages in this thread | | | From | nathan.zook@amd ... | Subject | RE: Possible workaround for buggy E801 call in 2.2.x | Date | Sun, 19 Dec 1999 17:39:52 -0600 |
| |
This is great! I've been so focused on validating the e820 return that I hadn't worried about e801. Could you send a pointer to the documentation?
(We are talking about having e801 off by default, but users have been known to enable options they shouldn't on one or two occasions.)
Nathan
> -----Original Message----- > From: Prashant TR [SMTP:prashant_tr@yahoo.com] > Sent: Sunday, December 19, 1999 1:56 AM > To: Zook, Nathan > Cc: set@pobox.com; Linux Kernel Mailing list > Subject: Possible workaround for buggy E801 call in 2.2.x > > Hi Nathan and Paul, > > Ok. The E801 call is broken on some BIOSes. So, can't we have > an arrangement like this: > > The docs for E801 mention that the max. that can be returned in > AX is 0x3c00. > > So, > > 1> If the E801 call returns AX < 0x3c00, then the system has < 64M > RAM (or the BIOS is broken) and the standard 88h call should give > the memory size. > > 2> If E801 returns AX > 0x3c00, then the BIOS is definitely broken > and again the standard 88h call should give the correct memory > size. > > In short, if AX!=0x3c00 after executing E801, then the standard > call can be used. > > I guess this can be a good workaround and can give nearly 100% > results. > > Prashant > ------------------------------------------ > One pound of learning requires ten pounds of > common sense to apply it. > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. > Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |