From owner-freebsd-hackers  Thu Nov 14 13:15:36 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id NAA06355
          for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 14 Nov 1996 13:15:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from brasil.moneng.mei.com (brasil.moneng.mei.com [151.186.109.160])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA06242
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Thu, 14 Nov 1996 13:14:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from jgreco@localhost) by brasil.moneng.mei.com (8.7.Beta.1/8.7.Beta.1) id PAA26018; Thu, 14 Nov 1996 15:13:41 -0600
From: Joe Greco <jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com>
Message-Id: <199611142113.PAA26018@brasil.moneng.mei.com>
Subject: Re: Hmmmm... now I'm confused
To: karl@mcs.net (Karl Denninger)
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 15:13:40 -0600 (CST)
Cc: hackers@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <199611141807.MAA29039@Jupiter.Mcs.Net> from "Karl Denninger" at Nov 14, 96 12:07:42 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
Content-Type: text
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?

Karl, I am assuming that you had a MAXMEM=128MB line before, and it worked?

I am a little confused.  What happens if you back the changes out entirely?

I am running MAXMEM=262720, MAXDSIZ=268435456UL, DFLDSIZ=201326592UL with
one de0 device on a P5/133 and 2.1.5R(++) with zero problems.  I have a
2.2-CURRENT box I could try it on if we can not figure out your problem,
and dropping in another 100baseT card would be easy for me too.

One difference between what you have and what I have, is the "UL" token
at the end of MAXDSIZ/DFLDSIZ.  I have no idea if it could cause what you
are seeing.

Please provide a little more data and I will see if I can duplicate your
problem later this evening.

Sorry I can't provide more help, there is not enough data yet.

... JG