On Tue, 27 Apr 1999, Warner Losh wrote:
> In message <199904272310.raa06...@mt.sri.com> Nate Williams writes:
> : 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
--
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
