From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 10 07:39:03 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9AF216A4CF for ; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 07:39:03 +0000 (GMT) Received: from tower.berklix.org (bsd.bsn.com [194.221.32.7]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B811643D31 for ; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 07:39:00 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhs@flat.berklix.net) Received: from js.berklix.net (pD950E293.dip.t-dialin.net [217.80.226.147]) (authenticated bits=0) by tower.berklix.org (8.12.9p2/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7A7bZhB045741; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 09:37:35 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from jhs@flat.berklix.net) Received: from king.jhs.private (king.jhs.private [192.168.91.46]) by js.berklix.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i7A7bMkM001831; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 09:37:22 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from jhs@flat.berklix.net) Received: from king.jhs.private (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by king.jhs.private (8.12.9p2/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7A7asx5000574; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 09:37:07 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from jhs@king.jhs.private) Message-Id: <200408100737.i7A7asx5000574@king.jhs.private> To: Danny Braniss From: "Julian Stacey" Organization: http://berklix.com/~jhs/ Munich Unix, BSD, Internet User-agent: EXMH http://beedub.com/exmh/ on FreeBSD http://freebsd.org In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 10 Aug 2004 09:20:57 +0300." <200408100621.i7A6L2hB045341@tower.berklix.org> Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 09:36:54 +0200 Sender: jhs@flat.berklix.net X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 11:40:49 +0000 cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: how to logically disable memory X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 07:39:04 -0000 > > Danny Braniss wrote: > > > hi, > > > is there an 'easy' way to mark some memory as unusable? > > > thanks, > > > danny > > > > You'll hopefully get a better answer than mine, but in case you don't > > & need to start hacking code ... > > > > Way back on 2.2.8 I disabled all above 16M 'cos one certain manufacturers > > mboard failed to cache & board went slower with more ram ! > > > > Can't remember much now, & doubtless patch doesnt apply now (& that > > 486 board not in service regularly) but it might give a clue where > > to look, looking at > > > > http://berklix.com/~jhs/src/bsd/fixes/FreeBSD/src/gen/sys/i386/i386/machdep > .c.maxmem.diff.ignore > > > > back then it seemed to be MAXMEM in sys/i386/i386/machdep.c > > Hi, > The short version: I need to disable 'some' physical memory, it's bad, > and so far can't find it to change it :-). > > The long version: this is an IBM Thinkpad X40, quiet new, that > lost it's warranty because somehow 'some liquid' was spilled on the keyboard. > It seems to have some 512M of memory on the motherboard, which after an > almost total dissasembly could not find. Windows crashes too often, but > FreeBSD is doing fine. So if i can just disable parts of it (memtest has > found the bad memory) then this is a neat notebook. > > danny Is the low boundary of what memtest shows, too low to sacrifice all above by patching out all above ? It would get you up & stable, with low performance. If after that you don't find an answer on hackers, probably best contact author of the swapper, who probably reads current@, or whose name may be found in CVS. If desperate, You might want to offer some incentive, eg bottle of Whisky or whatever, to whoever will write you some custom hacks to the swapper to patch out one range permanently ? Good luck. - Julian Stacey. Unix C & Net Services Consultant, Munich. http://berklix.com Mail Ascii plain text. Html dumped as Spam.