|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
I think that the amount of memory that the kernel recognizes is both a bios
issue and a kernel issue. The kernel retrives a lot of information from the
bios and if the bios only reports 64M ram the kernel will assume that the bios
is correct unless given further info. Also, kernels before < 2.1.? only auto
probed for values <= 64M. And further more I think that LILO has something to
deal with the amount of memory reported to the kernel.
So in synopsis I believe that the amount of ram reported to the kernel may be
contributed to various aspects of the system and not just one item.
Rebecca Ore wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 30, 2000 at 12:08:14PM -0500, Andrew Brennan wrote:
> > Is the 64Mb limit a kernel issue? I have a box that has 96Mb and it's not
> > finding it, but another with 128Mb and no problems (same kernels) and I've
> > always thought it was a BIOS issue. I'll admit I never did the homework -
--
0 0 Linux Force, Inc. http://www.LinuxForce.net
" Home Page: http://www.netaxs.com/~ldc/
_______ooO ~ Ooo_______________________________________________
LeRoy D. Cressy /\_/\ mailto:ldc@netaxs.com
Computer Consulting ( o.o ) Phone (215) 535-4037
> ^ < Fax (215) 535-4285
______________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group - http://plug.nothinbut.net
Announcements - http://lists.nothinbut.net/mail/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion - http://lists.nothinbut.net/mail/listinfo/plug
|
|