Prev: [PATCH 04/38] autofs4: Save autofs trigger's vfsmount in super block info
Next: [PATCH] Simplify conditional processing of fs/proc.o.
From: H. Peter Anvin on 22 Jun 2010 02:10
On 06/21/2010 10:22 PM, Josh Triplett wrote:
>
> How might I diagnose this further? What might cause Linux to refuse to
> use the e820 and e801 results provided by GRUB, but accept the ones
> provided by the BIOS?
>

This is interesting... you apparently have a ACPI 3-style e820 BIOS as
evidenced by the [1] markers, but Grub presents it as legacy style.
Now, the kernel shouldn't care, but this at least gives a clue.

Something that might be worthwhile is to add printf's to the kernel's
e820-parsing routine (in arch/x86/boot/e820.c) and figure out why it
doesn't like the output. It's a bit strange that meminfo would produce
sensible-looking output (well, legal, at least; presenting a two-byte
range is rather beyond crazy, and so forth) and the kernel wouldn't
accept it, as the code is intentionally very similar.

-hpa

--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.




--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: [PATCH 04/38] autofs4: Save autofs trigger's vfsmount in super block info
Next: [PATCH] Simplify conditional processing of fs/proc.o.