Thus spake Bruce Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Perhaps the problem with int 0x12 is the same as the one with int 0x15.
> Old implementations of int 0x12 just read the word at 0x40:0x13 in
> real or vm86 mode. This only requires physical page 0 to be mapped
> readable to work in vm86 calls. New imp
On Sat, 9 Nov 2002, David Schultz wrote:
> Thus spake Mitsuru IWASAKI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Hmmm, I didn't notice that there is a BIOS which requires
> > memory area below 640K even when calling INT 15H/E820.
> >
> > We cannot trust that today's BOISes have INT 12H, so it's
> > difficult to det
Thus spake Mitsuru IWASAKI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hmmm, I didn't notice that there is a BIOS which requires
> memory area below 640K even when calling INT 15H/E820.
>
> We cannot trust that today's BOISes have INT 12H, so it's
> difficult to determine base memory size w/o INT 15H/E820.
You keep s
> On Fri, 08 Nov 2002 16:14:06 -0800, Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>said:
Terry> Or look in the -current archives; Mitsuru IWASAKI posted a patch
Terry> yesterday at 11:29 PM.
Terry>
http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=1206362+0+current/freebsd-current
Hi,
I have
> On Fri, 8 Nov 2002 11:05:32 -0800 (PST), Nate Lawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Nate> Try disabling acpi:
Nate> echo "hint.acpi.0.disable=1" >> /boot/device.hints
Nate> My IBM laptop does not work with ACPI yet.
Hi,
I don't think acpi has got anything to do with his. I still
David Schultz wrote:
> Thus spake Sidcarter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Fatal trap 12: page fault while in vm86 mode
> > fault virtual address = 0x9fdc8
> ^^^
> That's a region of memory right before the 640K mark,
> and your BIOS is trying to use it. This used to work,
Thus spake Sidcarter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Fatal trap 12: page fault while in vm86 mode
> fault virtual address = 0x9fdc8
^^^
That's a region of memory right before the 640K mark,
and your BIOS is trying to use it. This used to work,
but revision 1.544 of src/sys/i38
- Nate Lawson's Original Message -
> On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, David Rhodu wrote:
> > Sidcarter wrote:
> > >Hi Folks,
> > >
> > > I just did a cvsup and installed a kernel. I have been trying this from
> > > the past few days with the same error. I am copying this by hand,
> > > since it crashes
On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, David Rhodu wrote:
> Sidcarter wrote:
>
> >Hi Folks,
> >
> >I just did a cvsup and installed a kernel. I have been trying this from the past
> >few days with the same error. I am copying this by hand, since it crashes
> >immediately after loading the modules.
> >The error messa
> On Fri, 08 Nov 2002 16:29:43 +0900 (JST), Mitsuru IWASAKI
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Mitsuru> Thanks
Mitsuru> Index: machdep.c
Mitsuru> ===
Mitsuru> RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/i386/i386/machdep.c,v
Mitsur
> OK, some questions:
> - What is the size of your base memory (reported by boot loader)?
> - Does attached patches solve your problem?
> - Is this problem specific to IBM Netvista?
>
> Thanks
>
> Index: locore.s
> ===
> RCS file:
Thus spake Michael G. Petry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I'm noticing the same behavior on a PPro system I have and am following
> the thread "SMP broken on PPro". It looks like the problem is not SMP
> specific, but it does seem PPro centric.
I observed the problem on a PPro as well, but it is not spe
Hi,
> Try backing out 1.544 of src/sys/i386/i386/machdep.c You'll need to do
> it as a reversed patch or by hand, as there are some unrelated signal
> handling things in 1.545 which you'll really need.
Hmmm, I didn't notice that there is a BIOS which requires
memory area below 640K even when call
> On Thu, 7 Nov 2002 10:24:23 -0800 (PST), Julian Elischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>said:
Julian> Are the modules also new?
Hi,
Yes, the modules are also new. But, I don't think it has anything to do
with the modules, cause even if I load the kernel after removing the
modules, I get the sam
On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Sidcarter wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> I just did a cvsup and installed a kernel. I have been trying this from the past
> few days with the same error. I am copying this by hand, since it crashes
> immediately after loading the modules.
The same is there with 4.7-STABLE
> The error
Try backing out 1.544 of src/sys/i386/i386/machdep.c You'll need to do
it as a reversed patch or by hand, as there are some unrelated signal
handling things in 1.545 which you'll really need.
Drew
Michael G. Petry writes:
>
> I'm noticing the same behavior on a PPro system I have and am fo
I'm noticing the same behavior on a PPro system I have and am following
the thread "SMP broken on PPro". It looks like the problem is not SMP
specific, but it does seem PPro centric.
> Are the modules also new?
>
>
> On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Sidcarter wrote:
>
> > Hi Folks,
> >
> > I just did a c
Are the modules also new?
On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Sidcarter wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> I just did a cvsup and installed a kernel. I have been trying this from the past
> few days with the same error. I am copying this by hand, since it crashes
> immediately after loading the modules.
> The error messag
> On Thu, 07 Nov 2002 10:29:29 -0500, David Rhodu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> processsor eflags= interrupt enabled, resume, vm86, IOPL=0
>> current process = 0 ()
>> kernel: type 12 trap, code=0
>> Stopped at 0x145e: addb%al,0(%eax)
db> t
>>
Sidcarter wrote:
Hi Folks,
I just did a cvsup and installed a kernel. I have been trying this from the past
few days with the same error. I am copying this by hand, since it crashes
immediately after loading the modules.
The error message is here
Hi Folks,
I just did a cvsup and installed a kernel. I have been trying this from the past
few days with the same error. I am copying this by hand, since it crashes
immediately after loading the modules.
The error message is here
Booting [/boot
21 matches
Mail list logo
