From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 8 19:12:15 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE96F16A420; Wed, 8 Feb 2006 19:12:15 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from nate@root.org) Received: from www.cryptography.com (li-22.members.linode.com [64.5.53.22]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E71C43D46; Wed, 8 Feb 2006 19:12:15 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from nate@root.org) Received: from [10.0.0.53] (adsl-67-119-74-222.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net [67.119.74.222]) by www.cryptography.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k18JCBEr021560 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 8 Feb 2006 11:12:11 -0800 Message-ID: <43EA4293.4030508@root.org> Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 11:12:19 -0800 From: Nate Lawson User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Baldwin References: <43E7D1A2.1030008@o2.pl> <43E9A4CA.9090701@root.org> <20060208093332.GA702@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <200602081036.09619.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <200602081036.09619.jhb@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Peter Jeremy , freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Kernel panic with ACPI enabled X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 19:12:15 -0000 John Baldwin wrote: > On Wednesday 08 February 2006 04:33, Peter Jeremy wrote: > >>On Tue, 2006-Feb-07 23:59:06 -0800, Nate Lawson wrote: >> >>>John Baldwin wrote: >>> >>>>Actually, in his case I'm fairly sure MAXMEM is the problem. Several >>>>people have had problems trying to use the tunable equivalent >>>>(hw.physmem=3g and the like) because if the new maxmem value is greater >>> >>>Can we at least put a printf() in the boot sequence that says "warning: >>>maxmem set and acpi enabled, this may cause problems"? This keeps >>>coming up. >> >>Presumably this isn't a problem where hw.physmem is used to artifically >>reduce the system for testing. > > > It depends on the value you use. Some values will be ok, some will break > things. The code that handles maxmem and physmem really needs to be > SMAP-aware and not use memory that we know isn't really memory. Yes, but I'd prefer the printf for now until SMAP support can be added. -- Nate