[LinuxBIOS] 440BX progress.
rminnich at gmail.com
Mon Dec 4 03:09:13 CET 2006
On 12/3/06, Segher Boessenkool <segher at kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> > Of course, given an OS that can handle non-contiguous ram, there would
> > never be a need to anything BUT size the DRB to max size. But that was
> > not the case in 1999.
> There's no _need_ sure, but the result is pretty nasty: say, a DRB
> is set up for 128MB, but the DIMM it covers is only 64MB; then any
> access to the "high half" of the DRB aliases to the lower addresses.
> Not a problem /an sich/, but it makes certain problems hard to debug.
no, because the e820 tables or whatever would set up a set of regions
of memory. OS would never access the memory that does not exist.
More information about the coreboot