From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Dec 21 17:38:31 1994 Return-Path: questions-owner Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) id RAA18635 for questions-outgoing; Wed, 21 Dec 1994 17:38:31 -0800 Received: from Root.COM (implode.Root.COM [198.145.90.1]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) with ESMTP id BAA18615 for ; Thu, 22 Dec 1994 01:38:26 GMT Received: from corbin.Root.COM (corbin.Root.COM [198.145.90.18]) by Root.COM (8.6.8/8.6.5) with ESMTP id RAA08170; Wed, 21 Dec 1994 17:38:16 -0800 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by corbin.Root.COM (8.6.9/8.6.5) with SMTP id RAA00933; Wed, 21 Dec 1994 17:38:15 -0800 Message-Id: <199412220138.RAA00933@corbin.Root.COM> X-Authentication-Warning: corbin.Root.COM: Host localhost didn't use HELO protocol To: Chuck Robey cc: FreeBSD Questions Subject: Re: More memory In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 21 Dec 94 20:30:18 EST." From: David Greenman Reply-To: davidg@Root.COM Date: Wed, 21 Dec 1994 17:38:15 -0800 Sender: questions-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk >On Wed, 21 Dec 1994, David Greenman wrote: > >> >For the next few days, you're gonna hear a lot from me; I've been waiting >> >for the semester break to do a LOT of upgrading. First point: I just got >> >some more memory, and before I upgrade my other machine to 2.0, I want to >> >move my present 1.1.5.1 machine from 16 to 20 megs of memory. I have a >> >1542C controller; will I have a problem, or do I need to do anything to >> >enable memory bounce? >> >> In 2.0, you must explicitly enable bounce buffer support with >> "options BOUNCE_BUFFERS". They are enabled in the provided GENERIC kernel. > >Thanks, David. I want to do the memory upgrade before I move from >1.1.5.1 to 2.0. Do I need to recompile my 1.1.5.1 kernel first? I don't >have any option "bounce buffers" in my config now, but I've experimented >recompiling my kernel lots, and feel comfortable with that. Will this >work? I want to move to 2.0 on Friday night. In 1.1.5, bounce buffer support is always included unless you specify "options NOBOUNCE". It was necessary to change the logic of the option because the previous form pre-supposes that a particular architecture even has them. -DG