Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 17:46:35 -0400 From: "Josh Carroll" <josh.carroll@gmail.com> To: "David Malone" <dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie> Cc: Bernd Walter <ticso@cicely7.cicely.de>, ticso@cicely.de, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: MTRR fixup? Message-ID: <8cb6106e0809031446i3e2a47dar385125ecfb0275dc@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20080903204759.GA4898@walton.maths.tcd.ie> References: <20080903034943.GD11548@cicely7.cicely.de> <20080903204759.GA4898@walton.maths.tcd.ie>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
> You may be able to fix this by just using the memcontrol command -
> it already lets you program the MTRRs.
Hmm, I think this explains why the amount of ACTIVE memory never
exceeds 3G on this box with 4G (with very little WIRED when it "stops"
at 3G).
I'm guessing this means I am affected:
0xd0000000/0x10000000 BIOS uncacheable set-by-firmware active
0xe0000000/0x20000000 BIOS uncacheable set-by-firmware active
I wrote a little script to parse the memcontrol output to make it a
little easier to digest at a glance.
Memory range [a0000 - a4000] : (640 - 656) is uncacheable {16 KB}
Memory range [a4000 - a8000] : (656 - 672) is uncacheable {16 KB}
Memory range [a8000 - ac000] : (672 - 688) is uncacheable {16 KB}
Memory range [ac000 - b0000] : (688 - 704) is uncacheable {16 KB}
Memory range [b0000 - b4000] : (704 - 720) is uncacheable {16 KB}
Memory range [b4000 - b8000] : (720 - 736) is uncacheable {16 KB}
Memory range [b8000 - bc000] : (736 - 752) is uncacheable {16 KB}
Memory range [bc000 - c0000] : (752 - 768) is uncacheable {16 KB}
Memory range [d0000000 - e0000000] : (3407872 - 3670016) is
uncacheable {262144 KB}
Memory range [e0000000 - 100000000] : (3670016 - 4194304) is
uncacheable {524288 KB}
So if I'm understanding this correctly, the top 768 MB of physical
memory on this box is uncacheable, but usable for other purposes?
I guess I haven't noticed this since FreeBSD does not (apparently?)
start caching from the top of memory like Linux does?
I'll have to play with memcontrol to see if I can set those two large
ranges as cacheable. So this is a BIOS bug? The board in question is
an Asus P5K-E with BIOS revision 1102, which uses an Intel P35
chipset.
Can someone confirm whether the above assumptions are correct?
Thanks,
Josh
help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8cb6106e0809031446i3e2a47dar385125ecfb0275dc>