From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 15 00:51:42 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3D3E106564A for ; Sun, 15 Feb 2009 00:51:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kpielorz_lst@tdx.co.uk) Received: from lorca.tdx.co.uk (lorca.tdx.co.uk [62.13.128.6]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68F7F8FC15 for ; Sun, 15 Feb 2009 00:51:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kpielorz_lst@tdx.co.uk) Received: from Octa64 (rainbow.tdx.co.uk [62.13.130.232] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by lorca.tdx.co.uk (8.14.0/8.14.0/Kp) with ESMTP id n1F0pePS003309; Sun, 15 Feb 2009 00:51:40 GMT Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2009 00:51:46 +0000 From: Karl Pielorz To: Max Laier , freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Message-ID: <4FF0CBDE2E90DAFEDE59D777@Octa64> In-Reply-To: <200902132008.38110.max@love2party.net> References: <12320CD678FB9B76CA7A29F1@Octa64> <200902132008.38110.max@love2party.net> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Cc: Subject: Re: Tyan S2895 7.1 amd64 >8Gb RAM support? X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2009 00:51:43 -0000 --On 13 February 2009 20:08 +0100 Max Laier wrote: > Can you maybe try to take the nVidia RAID out of the equation? I figure > the "professional" version of the chip is not that common so maybe the > corruption stems from the disk controller. Hi, I've tested with both Marvell (PCI-X), and Promise (PCI 32 Bit) SATA controllers now - it makes no difference. I upgraded the BIOS on the machine, and did a CMOS reset, then load factory defaults. I also then slowly upped the hw.physmem setting to see what would happen. I can now get this running at 8Gb [I've changed the email subject accordingly]. Any attempt to go over that (or remove the line from loader.conf completely) and it ends in the previous random crashes, compiler errors (e.g. warnings of internal bugs in gcc) - and occasional sig11's... e.g. >From compiling the kernel one time I got: " mkdep -f .depend -a -nostdinc -D_KERNEL -DKLD_MODULE -DHAVE_KERNEL_OPTION_HEADERS -I. -I@ -I@/contrib/altq -I/usr/src/sys/amd64/compile/GENERIC /usr/src/sys/modules/uslcom/../../dev/usb/uslcom.c ===> utopia (depend) @ -> /usr/src/sys /libexec/ld-elf.so.1: /lib/libc.so.7: Unsupported relocation type 88 in non-PLT relocations " I could probably live with only 8Gb in the machine, but it's going to be running some large ZFS pools (and a number of other tasks) - I'd like to have all 10Gb usable (especially if I move to 8.x eventually - and obviously, as it's physically in there, it'd be good to 'use it') Can anyone think of anything that is likely to break if you go >8Gb? [up from 4Gb since the BIOS was reflashed/reset & factory defaulted]. -Kp