Re: Anybody got 2.4.0 running on a 386 ?

[Brian Gerst]

Robert Kaiser wrote:
> 
> On Die, 09 Jan 2001 you wrote:
> > Robert Kaiser wrote:
> > >
> > > On Die, 09 Jan 2001 you wrote:
> > > > Robert Kaiser wrote:
> > > > > I can't seem to get the new 2.4.0 kernel running on a 386 CPU.
> > > > > The kernel was built for a 386 Processor, Math emulation has been enabled.
> > > > > I tried three different 386 boards. Execution seems to get as far as
> > > > > pagetable_init() in arch/i386/mm/init.c, then it falls back into the BIOS as
> > > > > if someone had pressed the reset button. The same kernel boots fine on
> > > > > 486 and Pentium Systems.
> > >  ..... The last thing I see is
> > > "Uncompressing Linux... Ok, booting the kernel." I have added some
> > > quick and dirty debug code that writes messages directly to the VGA
> > > screen buffer. According to that, execution seems to get as far as the
> > > statement
> > >
> > >         *pte = mk_pte_phys(__pa(vaddr), PAGE_KERNEL);
> > >
> >
> > Could it be possible that memory size is being misdetected?  Try mem=8M
> > (or less) on the command line.  Try to catch the value of pte when it
> > crashes.
> 
> I tried "mem=4M" -- no effect. The value of pte is 0xc0001000, so it seems
> to be the first invocation of that statement in the for() loop.
> 
> Now comes the amazing (to me) part: I split the above statement up into:
> 
>         temp = mk_pte_phys(__pa(vaddr), PAGE_KERNEL);
>         *pte = temp;
> 
> where temp is declared "volatile pte_t". I inserted test-prints between the
> above two lines. Accoding to that, the _first_ line , i.e. the evaluation of the
> mk_pte_phys() macro is causing the crash!
> 
> I am still trying to figure out what mk_pte_phys() does. Apparently it involves
> an access to the kernel's data section. My current guess is that the data
> section is not correctly mapped at this point. Would that be possible ?

How much physical memory does this box really have?

--

				Brian Gerst