Is there really no other more 'permanent' way to let the system know the amount of RAM, for example if Lilo isn't installed at all??
Well, in principle you shouldn't have to anymore with modern linux kernels..I think this used to be the case if you had more than 64 MB, but ... ? Cliff
Is there really no other more 'permanent' way to let the system know
Cliff, the
amount of RAM, for example if Lilo isn't installed at all??
Well, in principle you shouldn't have to anymore with modern linux kernels..I think this used to be the case if you had more than 64 MB, but ... ?
Cliff
Shouldn't and don't remain different here I fear. I am running kernel 2.2.16-SMP (SuSE 7.0 professional). Judging by the output from free and xosview specifying mem=512M in lilo has made a big difference to the system. Free used to report total memory as 64MB, it now reports 512MB. The memory line on xosview now shows much more free space and memory use of <320MB running something processor heavy (in MATLAB). Also the amount of swap space being used has dropped dramatically, which is what really makes me think that the mem parameter makes a difference. Of course all this may be different with newer kernels. Cheers, Mark
On Tuesday 06 February 2001 13:33, Cliff Sarginson wrote:
Is there really no other more 'permanent' way to let the system know the amount of RAM, for example if Lilo isn't installed at all??
Well, in principle you shouldn't have to anymore with modern linux kernels..I think this used to be the case if you had more than 64 MB, but ... ?
Cliff Right now even this doesn't help me:
image = /boot/vmlinuz.suse root = /dev/hda8 label = suse append="mem120M" Lilo is on the boot partition and still Linux only registers 64 RAM which is awful. This is kernel 2.2.16. Cheers, ei -- @~~ EagleIce ~ gnu4u@linux.nu ~~@ @~~ Running GNU/Linux & KDE ~~@
My dual P233 box with 192MB RAM running the 2.2.16-SMP kernel doesn't need any special lilo parameters either. It's on a Tyan board. I think it depends greatly on the BIOS memory reporting as to how much the kernel will automatically pick up. It is also my understanding that the append="mem=xxxM" (don't forget the second "=") does not cause the kernel to check the amount of memory. You could tell a 64MB system that it has 1024MB, but it will run slowly since it will always be paging. The append parameter simply tells the kernel how much memory it can assume is available, and it trusts you to enter the correct amount. I wonder if this is one of those AMI v Award v Phoenix v Other BIOS issues. It is also important to make sure that your BIOS does in fact see the full RAM. My mobo required that slower memory (60ns v 50ns) be placed in the SIMM slots closest to the controller chip. Until I got the physical SIMMs in the right order (three attempts), the BIOS would only register 64MB or 128MB, so no amount of append= could help me there. Once the memory was arranged properly, the BIOS saw it all, and so did Linux. Bye for now, Stuart. -----Original Message----- From: suse-linux-e-return-46320-stuart=yorkshirepudding.com@lists.suse.com [mailto:suse-linux-e-return-46320-stuart=yorkshirepudding.com@lists.suse .com]On Behalf Of EagleIce Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 8:31 AM To: suse-linux-e@suse.com Subject: Re: [SLE] Lilo mistake Right now even this doesn't help me: image = /boot/vmlinuz.suse root = /dev/hda8 label = suse append="mem120M"
Stuart Powell wrote:
My dual P233 box with 192MB RAM running the 2.2.16-SMP kernel doesn't need any special lilo parameters either. It's on a Tyan board. I think it depends greatly on the BIOS memory reporting as to how much the kernel will automatically pick up. It is also my understanding that the append="mem=xxxM" (don't forget the second "=") does not cause the kernel to check the amount of memory. You could tell a 64MB system that it has 1024MB, but it will run slowly since it will always be paging. The append parameter simply tells the kernel how much memory it can assume is available, and it trusts you to enter the correct amount.
Thank you for clarifying this.
I wonder if this is one of those AMI v Award v Phoenix v Other BIOS
issues.
It is also important to make sure that your BIOS does in fact see the full RAM. My mobo required that slower memory (60ns v 50ns) be placed in the SIMM slots closest to the controller chip. Until I got the physical SIMMs in the right order (three attempts), the BIOS would only register 64MB or 128MB, so no amount of append= could help me there. Once the memory was arranged properly, the BIOS saw it all, and so did Linux.
Interesting theory. I do know that the BIOS reports the correct amount of memory on my machine as I sit and watch it count up to 512MB everytime it reboots (which is quite frequent at the moment as I am experimenting with alternative lilo parameters for other things at present as well). Also WinNT 4.0 also correctly detects the amount of RAM, but fails to detect the second processor curiously. ("15 all" I think on this one ;-) I would tell you the BIOS but that I can't remember and the machine is in the middle of some serious number crunching otherwise I'd reboot and check for you. Cheers, Mark
Mark Daglish wrote:
Stuart Powell wrote:
My dual P233 box with 192MB RAM running the 2.2.16-SMP kernel doesn't need any special lilo parameters either. It's on a Tyan board. I think it depends greatly on the BIOS memory reporting as to how much the kernel will automatically pick up. It is also my understanding that the append="mem=xxxM" (don't forget the second "=") does not cause the kernel to check the amount of memory. You could tell a 64MB system that it has 1024MB, but it will run slowly since it will always be paging. The append parameter simply tells the kernel how much memory it can assume is available, and it trusts you to enter the correct amount.
It is not necessarily kernel dependant - I've run SuSE 6.1 with kernels 2.2.5, 2.2.14, and others on a machine with 128MB of RAM, and have never had to use that particular parameter.
I wonder if this is one of those AMI v Award v Phoenix v Other BIOS issues. It is also important to make sure that your BIOS does in fact see the full RAM. My mobo required that slower memory (60ns v 50ns) be placed in the SIMM slots closest to the controller chip. Until I got the physical SIMMs in the right order (three attempts), the BIOS would only register 64MB or 128MB, so no amount of append= could help me there. Once the memory was arranged properly, the BIOS saw it all, and so did Linux.
Interesting theory. I do know that the BIOS reports the correct amount of memory on my machine as I sit and watch it count up to 512MB everytime it reboots (which is quite frequent at the moment as I am experimenting with alternative lilo parameters for other things at present as well).
At one time I thought the problem was to do with the "Memory Hole at 64MB" found in some BIOSes. Now I'm under the impression that this is to do with the BIOS function used to query the amount of RAM. There was a new function introduced (without a freely available specification) that replaced an older function to report memory sizes greater than 64MB. As a result some BIOSes dropped the older function, so an even older function that only reports up to 64MB must be used. This is fixed in more recent kernels (especially 2.4.x).
WinNT 4.0 also correctly detects the amount of RAM, but fails to detect
Microsoft will have got hold of the BIOS function spec so that they could include this in their OSes.
the second processor curiously. ("15 all" I think on this one ;-) I would
Is it a uniprocessor kernel? That would explain it.
tell you the BIOS but that I can't remember and the machine is in the middle of some serious number crunching otherwise I'd reboot and check for you.
Bye, Chris -- __ _ -o)/ / (_)__ __ ____ __ Chris Reeves /\\ /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / ICQ# 22219005 _\_v __/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\
Mark, I realise that this is not an NT support list, but if you installed NT on that box with a single CPU, then added a second, you will only have the uniprocessor kernel. To upgrade to the multi-processor kernel, you will need to track down a utility called "uptomp.exe" which is part of the NT ResKit. Be careful, though, it pulls the original kernel from the original media, so you might have problems until you re-apply SP6a. It is often better to just bite the bullet and do a nice clean install of NT. Obviously this would screw up lilo in the MBR, so you'd have to create a Linux boot disk, and then rerun lilo once NT is back on the machine etc etc etc. In fact, it is prudent to do a nice clean install of NT fairly frequently; say every 6-8 months. NT of course knows this, and sometimes forces you to do this, usually at the most inopportune time. And before the flame war starts, I know where I'm coming from. I know we MCSEs get a hard time on this list, but (and this is for all the naysayers out there) I do actually know what I'm talking about. And, up here in the American mid-west, it's still NT that pays the bills I'm afraid. Bye for now, Stuart. -----Original Message----- From: Mark Daglish [mailto:mark.daglish@bristol.ac.uk] Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 10:36 AM To: stuart; suse-linux-e Subject: Re: [SLE] Lilo mistake Also WinNT 4.0 also correctly detects the amount of RAM, but fails to detect the second processor curiously. Mark
On Tuesday 06 February 2001 10:21, Stuart Powell wrote:
I wonder if this is one of those AMI v Award v Phoenix v Other BIOS issues. It is also important to make sure that your BIOS does in fact
To clarify all "wonders" check the link below, but it boils down to a BIOS "thing": http://linuxnewbie.internet.com/nhf/intel/hardware/ramdetect.html Hope it helps, Alvaro Novo SuSE 6.4 -=- Kernel 2.4.0 -=- KDE 2.1.0-Beta2-0 10:48am up 7 days, 19:17, 6 users, load average: 0.77, 0.30, 0.19
Ah, thank you Álvaro, I needed that one.....:-) Cheers, ei On Tuesday 06 February 2001 17:49, Álvaro A. Novo wrote:
To clarify all "wonders" check the link below, but it boils down to a BIOS "thing":
http://linuxnewbie.internet.com/nhf/intel/hardware/ramdetect.html
Hope it helps,
Alvaro Novo
-- @~~ EagleIce ~ gnu4u@linux.nu ~~@ @~~ Running GNU/Linux & KDE ~~@
EagleIce wrote:
On Tuesday 06 February 2001 13:33, Cliff Sarginson wrote:
Is there really no other more 'permanent' way to let the system know the amount of RAM, for example if Lilo isn't installed at all??
Well, in principle you shouldn't have to anymore with modern linux kernels..I think this used to be the case if you had more than 64 MB, but ... ?
Cliff Right now even this doesn't help me:
image = /boot/vmlinuz.suse root = /dev/hda8 label = suse append="mem120M"
Lilo is on the boot partition and still Linux only registers 64 RAM which is awful. This is kernel 2.2.16.
You have it in the wrong place. Do it like this. # LILO Konfigurations-Datei # Start LILO global Section # If you want to prevent console users to boot with init=/bin/bash, # restrict usage of boot params by setting a passwd and using the option # restricted. #password=bootpwd #restricted append="mem=128m" boot=/dev/hda #compact # faster, but won't work on all systems. linear vga=normal read-only prompt timeout=100 # End LILO global Section # image = /boot/vmlinuz root = /dev/hda5 label = linux # other = /dev/sda1 label = win map-drive = 0x80 to = 0x81 map-drive = 0x81 to = 0x80 table = /dev/sda -- Mark Hounschell markh@compro.net
Mark Hounschell wrote:
EagleIce wrote:
On Tuesday 06 February 2001 13:33, Cliff Sarginson wrote:
Is there really no other more 'permanent' way to let the system know the amount of RAM, for example if Lilo isn't installed at all??
Well, in principle you shouldn't have to anymore with modern linux kernels..I think this used to be the case if you had more than 64 MB, but ... ?
Cliff Right now even this doesn't help me:
image = /boot/vmlinuz.suse root = /dev/hda8 label = suse append="mem120M"
Lilo is on the boot partition and still Linux only registers 64 RAM which is awful. This is kernel 2.2.16.
You have it in the wrong place.
Not necessarily. The append parameter may be either a global option (in which case it will become a default for all kernels) or in the individual image section for parameters specific to a particular kernel. For example, you may have two kernel images - on with and one without the driver for your network card compiled in. The first kernel may need parameters for irq/io for the card, while the second card will not need these as they can be set in /etc/modules.conf. Putting an = sign in between the 'mem' and the '120M' may help though. Bye, Chris -- __ _ -o)/ / (_)__ __ ____ __ Chris Reeves /\\ /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / ICQ# 22219005 _\_v __/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\
Yep, It needs append="mem=120M". The kernel should query the computer BIOS to get the exact amoutn of RAM, but is not in your case (I have no idea why). Matt On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Chris Reeves wrote:
Mark Hounschell wrote:
EagleIce wrote:
On Tuesday 06 February 2001 13:33, Cliff Sarginson wrote:
Is there really no other more 'permanent' way to let the system know the amount of RAM, for example if Lilo isn't installed at all??
Well, in principle you shouldn't have to anymore with modern linux kernels..I think this used to be the case if you had more than 64 MB, but ... ?
Cliff Right now even this doesn't help me:
image = /boot/vmlinuz.suse root = /dev/hda8 label = suse append="mem120M"
Lilo is on the boot partition and still Linux only registers 64 RAM which is awful. This is kernel 2.2.16.
You have it in the wrong place.
Not necessarily. The append parameter may be either a global option (in which case it will become a default for all kernels) or in the individual image section for parameters specific to a particular kernel. For example, you may have two kernel images - on with and one without the driver for your network card compiled in. The first kernel may need parameters for irq/io for the card, while the second card will not need these as they can be set in /etc/modules.conf.
Putting an = sign in between the 'mem' and the '120M' may help though.
Bye, Chris -- __ _ -o)/ / (_)__ __ ____ __ Chris Reeves /\\ /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / ICQ# 22219005 _\_v __/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\
-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/support/faq
On Tuesday 06 February 2001 18:36, Chris Reeves wrote:
Not necessarily. The append parameter may be either a global option (in which case it will become a default for all kernels) or in the individual image section for parameters specific to a particular kernel. For example, you may have two kernel images - on with and one without the driver for your network card compiled in. The first kernel may need parameters for irq/io for the card, while the second card will not need these as they can be set in /etc/modules.conf.
Putting an = sign in between the 'mem' and the '120M' may help though.
Bye, Chris
Chris! You are not only right, you are 100% right, there was a = missing between 'mem' and '128M'. I apologise for having put so many brain cells in motion because of this. Even though I've written the lilo.conf file so many times I make such a mistake, perhaps it's easyer to get blind on details when you do the same thing very often. But now I've at least learned something. The sum of all this seems to be that; the only way to configure the system to detect the right amount of RAM, if the kernel doesn't detect it by itself, is via the bootup config file. Thank's all for your help. Cheers, ei -- @~~ EagleIce ~ gnu4u@linux.nu ~~@ @~~ Running GNU/Linux & KDE ~~@
Mark! No I don't have it in the wrong place! I've written the lilo.conf file from scratch so many times for so many different Linux dist's on so many different boxes that I know by experience. The append="mem128M" is 'also' where you got it in my file (put there by YaST), but it didn't work so I put it under the label line like I usually do, and it still doesn't work. Cheers, ei On Tuesday 06 February 2001 17:41, Mark Hounschell wrote:
EagleIce wrote:
Right now even this doesn't help me:
image = /boot/vmlinuz.suse root = /dev/hda8 label = suse append="mem128M"
Lilo is on the boot partition and still Linux only registers 64 RAM which is awful. This is kernel 2.2.16.
You have it in the wrong place. Do it like this.
# LILO Konfigurations-Datei # Start LILO global Section # If you want to prevent console users to boot with init=/bin/bash, # restrict usage of boot params by setting a passwd and using the option # restricted. #password=bootpwd #restricted append="mem=128m" boot=/dev/hda #compact # faster, but won't work on all systems. linear vga=normal read-only prompt timeout=100 # End LILO global Section # image = /boot/vmlinuz root = /dev/hda5 label = linux # other = /dev/sda1 label = win map-drive = 0x80 to = 0x81 map-drive = 0x81 to = 0x80 table = /dev/sda
-- @~~ EagleIce ~ gnu4u@linux.nu ~~@ @~~ Running GNU/Linux & KDE ~~@
participants (8)
-
Chris Reeves -
Cliff Sarginson -
EagleIce -
Mark Daglish -
Mark Hounschell -
Matthew -
Stuart Powell -
Álvaro A. Novo