xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Ramdisk size etc

To: Juha Saarinen <juha@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Ramdisk size etc
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Date: 22 May 2001 19:54:10 -0500
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0105231146470.23119-100000@vimfuego.saarinen.org>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0105231146470.23119-100000@vimfuego.saarinen.org>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
On 23 May 2001 11:50:13 +1200, Juha Saarinen wrote:

> I'm going to rebuild the 2.4.2 kernel, and was wondering about the default
> RAM disk size. In /etc/lilo.conf you have:
> 
>         append="ramdisk_size=2500"
> 
> for both the SMP and the UP kernel. Is that what the default value was set
> to in the kernel .config file as well?

Here is how I understand this stuff:

The value in the kernel is just the default for what the ramdisk size
should be; passing a parameter to lilo overrides that.

Also, this option just sets an upper bound on the size of the ramdisk.
So I wouldn't worry TOO much about getting the size just right.

(But FWIW, the size is set to the default 4086 (4M) in the RPM kernel
configs)

> Also, for the SMP kernels, it might be an idea to take out APM support, as
> it's supposedly not SMP safe.

Configure.help says this:

  Note that the APM support is almost completely disabled for
  machines with more than one CPU.

At one point there was a discussion about allowing a tiny subset of AMP
functionality on SMP machines - basically, to allow soft power-off -
since so few machines are supported by ACPI under Linux at this point.

Since the configuration is _possible_, I assume (?) that it's safe, as
implemented.

-Eric

-----
Eric Sandeen      XFS for Linux     http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs
sandeen@xxxxxxx   SGI, Inc.



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>