lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Jan]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Anybody got 2.4.0 running on a 386 ?
    Robert Kaiser wrote:
    >
    > On Die, 09 Jan 2001 you wrote:
    > > Robert Kaiser wrote:
    > > >
    > > > On Die, 09 Jan 2001 you wrote:
    > > > > Robert Kaiser wrote:
    > > > > > I can't seem to get the new 2.4.0 kernel running on a 386 CPU.
    > > > > > The kernel was built for a 386 Processor, Math emulation has been enabled.
    > > > > > I tried three different 386 boards. Execution seems to get as far as
    > > > > > pagetable_init() in arch/i386/mm/init.c, then it falls back into the BIOS as
    > > > > > if someone had pressed the reset button. The same kernel boots fine on
    > > > > > 486 and Pentium Systems.
    > > > ..... The last thing I see is
    > > > "Uncompressing Linux... Ok, booting the kernel." I have added some
    > > > quick and dirty debug code that writes messages directly to the VGA
    > > > screen buffer. According to that, execution seems to get as far as the
    > > > statement
    > > >
    > > > *pte = mk_pte_phys(__pa(vaddr), PAGE_KERNEL);
    > > >
    > >
    > > Could it be possible that memory size is being misdetected? Try mem=8M
    > > (or less) on the command line. Try to catch the value of pte when it
    > > crashes.
    >
    > I tried "mem=4M" -- no effect. The value of pte is 0xc0001000, so it seems
    > to be the first invocation of that statement in the for() loop.
    >
    > Now comes the amazing (to me) part: I split the above statement up into:
    >
    > temp = mk_pte_phys(__pa(vaddr), PAGE_KERNEL);
    > *pte = temp;
    >
    > where temp is declared "volatile pte_t". I inserted test-prints between the
    > above two lines. Accoding to that, the _first_ line , i.e. the evaluation of the
    > mk_pte_phys() macro is causing the crash!
    >
    > I am still trying to figure out what mk_pte_phys() does. Apparently it involves
    > an access to the kernel's data section. My current guess is that the data
    > section is not correctly mapped at this point. Would that be possible ?

    How much physical memory does this box really have?

    --

    Brian Gerst
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:28    [from the cache]
    ©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean