Messages in this thread | | | From | nathan.zook@amd ... | Subject | RE: Possible workaround for buggy E801 call in 2.2.x | Date | Mon, 20 Dec 1999 20:48:27 -0600 |
| |
It depends a little on what you mean by "broken". At least one bios provider has decided to comment e801 out of thier code. That's how I got involved.
Nathan
> -----Original Message----- > From: Prashant TR [SMTP:prashant_tr@yahoo.com] > Sent: Monday, December 20, 1999 8:43 PM > To: david parsons > Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing list > Subject: Re: Possible workaround for buggy E801 call in 2.2.x > > david parsons wrote: > > > If you're assuming that E801 is only broken when AX > > 15mb, you'll get bitten when your 12mb machine cheerfully > > E801's back 14.5mb in AX > > But I did mention that we would be using the standard call in that > case. Currently there is nothing that can detect the memory size > perfectly. E801 _does_ fail on many systems. The question now > is whether there have been failures with E820. So, maybe E801 > should be off by default. Most of the new software use E820, too. > > > Are there any cases where a system does not have E820 but has a > > broken E801? And in that case, is there any safe way to deal > > with it? > > I don't know of a system with E820 and a broken E801 at present. > > 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/
- 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/
| |