Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 00:20:03 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: nate@root.org, des@ofug.org, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: "MB" instead of "K bytes" in memory probe? Message-ID: <200210300820.g9U8K3wB014618@apollo.backplane.com> References: <xzpiszk4k1e.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0210292331030.89254-100000@root.org> <20021030.010347.76766507.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Keep in mind that Des's change is still printing the total number
of bytes, in bytes. The MB is in parenthesis.
Oct 29 15:55:18 dsa kernel: real memory = 266493952 (254 MB)
There is no need to do anything fancy inside the parenthesis. It
should just be in megabytes (as DES presented). If the machine
has so little memory that '1 MB' or '2 MB' meaningless, then the
user can still read the actual number of bytes. I would certainly
find the MB number useful no matter how little memory the computer
has.
-Matt
:: think 4 MB was the lowest) and that the values are only for the benefit of
:: the user, sounds great.
:
:Actually, ultra-stripped 1.0 kernels were being booted on 2MB and 3MB
:386SX systems. It was possible to build 1.0 kernels that were 500k or
:so if you restricted devices and features severely.
:
:But you are right. We should use MB for anything under about 2G or so
:(but even 4G vs 4096M isn't that bad).
:
:Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200210300820.g9U8K3wB014618>