On 12/17/2010 11:50 AM, Vivek Goyal wrote:
quoted text
> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 11:46:08AM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>> On 12/17/2010 11:39 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>> On 12/17/2010 10:21 AM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do we have actual testing for how high the 64-bit kernel will load?
>>>>>
>>>>> I will do some experiments on my box today and let you know.
>>>>
>>>> if bzImage is used, it is 896M.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Why?  896 MiB is a 32-bit kernel limitation which doesn't have anything
>>> to do with the bzImage format.
>>>
>>> So unless there is something going on here, I suspect you're just plain
>>> flat wrong.
>>
>> kexec-tools have some checking when it loads bzImage.
>>
> 
> Yinghai,
> 
> I think x86_64 might have just inherited the settings of 32bit without
> giving it too much of thought. At that point of time nobody bothered
> to load the kernel from high addresses. So these might be artificial
> limits.
> 

Can we do this in the meantime, just so we fix the immediate problem?

	-hpa