[lkml]   [1998]   [Oct]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectBreaking the 64MB barrier

I am aware that passing the "mem=XX" option in LILO overcomes this
problem; this is irrelevant because it has nothing to do with what I'm
about to ask (for you rapid-reply "RTFM" people).

The question is this: I had a debate with someone about the 64MB+
memory issue with Linux. Their position is that it's a bug in the kernel,
and mine was that it was an x86 BIOS limitation. I have two questions:
1.) who's right? 2.) How is it that Microsoft is able to deal with this
without a bootloader option, and we can't? Seems this is a sizeable flaw
(regardless of the cause) for systems where the memory amount may be
changed dynamically. If this is indeed a kernel limitation, what would be
required to get past it?

B. James Phillippe .
UNIX Software Engineer .
Member since 1.1.59 .
MOTM: Waiting for the DSL to go in :)

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:45    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean