From owner-freebsd-hackers  Thu Nov 14 10:34:55 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA24376
          for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 14 Nov 1996 10:34:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dyson.iquest.net ([198.70.144.127])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA24357
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Thu, 14 Nov 1996 10:34:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from root@localhost) by dyson.iquest.net (8.8.2/8.6.9) id NAA01376; Thu, 14 Nov 1996 13:34:27 -0500 (EST)
From: John Dyson <dyson@dyson.iquest.net>
Message-Id: <199611141834.NAA01376@dyson.iquest.net>
Subject: Re: Hmmmm... now I'm confused
To: karl@Mcs.Net (Karl Denninger)
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 13:34:27 -0500 (EST)
Cc: hackers@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <199611141807.MAA29039@Jupiter.Mcs.Net> from "Karl Denninger" at Nov 14, 96 12:07:42 pm
Reply-To: dyson@freebsd.org
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME8]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> 
> Hi folks,
> 
> Ok, now I don't understand.....
> 
> I built a new kernel with -current to support more than 128MB with the
> following options....
> 
> options         "MAXMEM=262144"         # 256 * 1024, 256MB maximum RAM
> options         "MAXDSIZ=201326592"
> options         "DFLDSIZ=201326592"
> 
> 256MB supported RAM and huge process sizes...
> 
> Those were the only changes from a working kernel which is running on
> the same hardware (a Pentium PRO 200 with 128MB of RAM).   Then I added
> more physical memory.
> 
> I rebooted, and the "de" cards in the box (two 100BaseTX boards) both
> disappeared!
> 
> They identify ok during the boot, and claim to be there, but an "ifconfig
> de0" comes up "no such device"!
> 
> I removed the extra RAM and went back to 128M, and it STILL happens!  
> With or without the memory in there; it appears that the MAXMEM line up
> there blows the de cards out of the water!
> 
> What's going on here, and is there a work-around for this?
> 
Did you control the experiment and determine if it is/might be the
MAXMEM (phys mem) or the MAX/DFL DSIZ definitions?  It sounds to me
that it is the (MAX/DFL)DSIZ definitions -- right, or am I dense? :-)...

John