linux-kernel - Re: x86_64 ten times slower than i386

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Pine.A41.4.64.0711032334170.770224@stalin.acc.umu.se>
Date:	Sat, 3 Nov 2007 23:38:24 +0100 (CET)
From:	Bo Brantén <bosse@....umu.se>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
cc:	mpm@...enic.com
Subject: Re: x86_64 ten times slower than i386

On Sat, 3 Nov 2007, Matt Mackall wrote:

> This is typically due to a problem with the setup of your MTRRs. Try
> booting with mem=nnnM where nnn is some number smaller than your
> actual amount of memory.

Thank you for that advice, the system has 4GB and if I boot with mem=3072M 
it will run as fast as normal while if I don't use the mem option it will 
run 10 times slower, however if I use a figure like mem=3500M the kernel 
will panic, is there any way to determine the highest usable figure 
without try and error?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/