Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 16:53:13 +0000 (GMT) From: Gavin Atkinson <gavin@FreeBSD.org> To: Attila Nagy <bra@fsn.hu> Cc: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org>, Dimitry Andric <dimitry@andric.com>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD panics with 64GiB of RAM Message-ID: <20090118164930.R24894@ury.york.ac.uk> In-Reply-To: <49720DFE.3080808@fsn.hu> References: <496B115F.1000105@fsn.hu> <4970BB63.7030601@andric.com> <4970E8C0.1080005@FreeBSD.org> <49720DFE.3080808@fsn.hu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 17 Jan 2009, Attila Nagy wrote: > Hello, > > I've already tried something similar. The effect of the patch is this: > http://people.fsn.hu/~bra/freebsd/20090107-freebsd-x4540/Screenshot-70.png > > BTW, this: > ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/snapshots/200812/8.0-CURRENT-200812-amd64-bootonly.iso > boots up fine (to sysinstall). > I haven't installed FreeBSD for years (I'm using netboot), is this i386? > That could explain the situation. I'm confused. That link is a snapshot of amd64 -CURRENT from December. The first email in this thread said you were trying -CURRENT anmd64 and it wasn't working. So, which ones work and which don't? Are we looking at a regression since December or has this been fixed between whatever image you first tested and the December snapshot? Gavin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090118164930.R24894>