PAE into the Official Kernel

aliasbody · 2011-06-24 14:11:27

Hi Everyone,
This is just a simple question asked by a simple user of Linux.

I've read a lot of topics talking about adding support for pae in Arch Linux official kernel. And I've seen really good arguments to do so.

My question is, as I'm interested too in this feature (without having to install the kernel26 from AUR), I want to know if there is anyway I can contribute to test the kernel with pae activated and help the community to implement that feature into future arch Linux kernels by default ?

Thanks in advance,
Luis Da Costa

Last edited by aliasbody (2011-06-24 14:11:51)

karol · 2011-06-24 14:21:13

PAE has some drawbacks and not many people will benefit from it: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/20338

Leonid.I · 2011-06-24 19:04:45

aliasbody wrote:

And I've seen really good arguments to do so.

For example? PAE was designed as a transitional stage between 32 and 64 bit architectures. It should die out eventually...

djgera · 2011-06-24 19:12:22

PAE is always on "long mode" (in other words, 64 bits).

Leonid.I · 2011-06-24 19:32:28

Well, I am not a pro, but apparently it's not (I mentioned this somewhere on this forum already, but forgot where): http://blog.linuxolution.org/archives/117.

Besides, pure 64bit linux is mature, so pae is not required... and having 4GB+ of RAM, I don't care if the kernel eats 50MB more memory, relative to 32bit.

djgera · 2011-06-24 20:39:50

This is independent from OS. PAE is required for enter in LM. Long mode is a superset of PAE.

flamelab · 2011-06-25 06:22:32

No, it should not. Linus agrees with me.

Last edited by flamelab (2011-06-25 06:22:59)

aliasbody · 2011-07-07 21:13:54

I have read a lot about it, and now I understand the why that this feature is not in the official Arch Linux 32bits kernel. I've already think about installing the 64bits versions of Arch linux, but sincerly I don't know if this is a good idea :S... I really don't want to have problems with lib32 packages, flash and co.... and since my laptop already as problems to run a lot of stuff correctly (because of the nvidia optimus... oh right bumblebee and 64bits zs dammit :S) I really don't know if this can be a good choice for a day use (personal and work) OS to install on my 1215N :S.... this is why I've asked the question about the PAE activation...

Can you help me with this ? is this a good time to move into full 64 bits on my Arch linux ? is there any lack of support, non functional software, or know bugs (like Gnome3, intel graphics etc... only on 64bits) ?

PS : Another question... I've seen that people who uses Arch Linux 64bits quite always used Arch Linux 64 bits too but just for grub... why ?

Thanks in advance and sorry for all my questions ^^

tomk · 2011-07-07 21:34:04

aliasbody wrote:

is this a good time to move into full 64 bits on my Arch linux ?

Yes - no major showstoppers, just do it.

aliasbody wrote:

I've seen that people who uses Arch Linux 64bits quite always used Arch Linux 64 bits too but just for grub... why ?

Clarify please.

aliasbody · 2011-07-07 21:38:21

tomk wrote:

aliasbody wrote:
is this a good time to move into full 64 bits on my Arch linux ?
Yes - no major showstoppers, just do it.
aliasbody wrote:
I've seen that people who uses Arch Linux 64bits quite always used Arch Linux 64 bits too but just for grub... why ?
Clarify please.

euh.. sorry XD What I was saying is that, sometimes when I see configurations of some Arch Linux users in the forum, I quite always see that they use Arch linux 64bits in one partition and Arch linux 32bits in another partition, and they say that the 32bits partition it's just to handle the grub thing... is this true or necessary ?

Thanks in Advance

tomk · 2011-07-07 23:30:45

Definitely not necessary - and I've never come across anyone who does that. An actual example might help, because what you're saying doesn't make any sense.

lifeafter2am · 2011-07-07 23:38:36

aliasbody wrote:

tomk wrote:
aliasbody wrote:
is this a good time to move into full 64 bits on my Arch linux ?
Yes - no major showstoppers, just do it.
aliasbody wrote:
I've seen that people who uses Arch Linux 64bits quite always used Arch Linux 64 bits too but just for grub... why ?
Clarify please.
euh.. sorry XD What I was saying is that, sometimes when I see configurations of some Arch Linux users in the forum, I quite always see that they use Arch linux 64bits in one partition and Arch linux 32bits in another partition, and they say that the 32bits partition it's just to handle the grub thing... is this true or necessary ?
Thanks in Advance

Both my laptop and desktop are full 64bit, running flash, no issues with grub etc. Seriously, there isn't anything I can't do in 64bits that I need to.

karol · 2011-07-08 00:07:30

tomk wrote:

Definitely not necessary - and I've never come across anyone who does that. An actual example might help, because what you're saying doesn't make any sense.

Maybe he means EFI system partition which I've read should be formated FAT32? Yes, I know it's far fetched and the firmware itself can be 64-bit too so ...

mhertz · 2011-07-08 00:38:29

It's true that grub-legacy is x86-only and needs a x86 build of glibc, but pure-x86-64 linux distros like arch resolves this issue by providing a static build of grub where glibc-x86 is statically linked to grub in the binary and hence the bigger size...

aliasbody · 2011-07-08 09:47:21

Thanks for you help ^^ I think I will install Arch 64bits so ^^

karol wrote:

tomk wrote:
Definitely not necessary - and I've never come across anyone who does that. An actual example might help, because what you're saying doesn't make any sense.
Maybe he means EFI system partition which I've read should be formated FAT32? Yes, I know it's far fetched and the firmware itself can be 64-bit too so ...

EFI ? When I bought my laptopt Asus 1215N, it came with an EFI partition which makes my Windows start in about 15seconds and shutdown in about 5seconds... To install Arch, I've deleted it... Did the EFI partition make any diferente to the Arch linux x64 partition ?

Thanks in Advance

Last edited by aliasbody (2011-07-08 09:49:53)

kishd · 2011-07-08 10:47:53

The EFI partition is just for the boot booster feature in the bios. It makes no difference to the installed os.

Leonid.I · 2011-07-08 15:32:25

kishd wrote:

The EFI partition is just for the boot booster feature in the bios. It makes no difference to the installed os.

Not to hijack the thread, but how does it work exactly? On my laptop I have a small boot partition with windows filesystem structure. However, in BIOS the option "UEFI boot" is disabled. Does it mean that this partition is not used in Windows and just sitting around wasting space?

I just installed arch x64 with grub-legacy (on /dev/sda) and everything including dualboot with Windows 7 x32 works as expected... The above "boot" partition is marked SYSTEM in arch and is recognized as a vfat external fs.

aliasbody · 2011-07-08 21:55:03

If I remember correctly, if you have the UEFI Boot option enabled in the Bios you need to have a formatted EFI partition with a specific software (which is my case on the 1215N :s...)

PS : I've installed 64bits on my desktop (just to try) with 4Gb of ram... Kde is using 500Mb of ram at start and 2gb after a while (allocated not buffers) :S... this can be bad for my netbook where I want to install the 64Bits version since I only have 2Gb for now and where I plan to install a 4Gb stick of ram later, no :S ?

Thanks in Advance,
Luis Da Costa

Last edited by aliasbody (2011-07-08 21:55:20)

litemotiv · 2011-07-08 22:19:24

It's mostly cache, don't worry about it. It will be released when another process needs it.

aliasbody · 2011-07-08 22:21:12

litemotiv wrote:

It's mostly cache, don't worry about it. It will be released when another process needs it.

Thanks a lot for the answers ^^

Arch Linux

#1 2011-06-24 14:11:27

PAE into the Official Kernel

#2 2011-06-24 14:21:13

Re: PAE into the Official Kernel

#3 2011-06-24 19:04:45

Re: PAE into the Official Kernel

#4 2011-06-24 19:12:22

Re: PAE into the Official Kernel

#5 2011-06-24 19:32:28

Re: PAE into the Official Kernel

#6 2011-06-24 20:39:50

Re: PAE into the Official Kernel

#7 2011-06-25 06:22:32

Re: PAE into the Official Kernel

#8 2011-07-07 21:13:54

Re: PAE into the Official Kernel

#9 2011-07-07 21:34:04

Re: PAE into the Official Kernel

#10 2011-07-07 21:38:21

Re: PAE into the Official Kernel

#11 2011-07-07 23:30:45

Re: PAE into the Official Kernel

#12 2011-07-07 23:38:36

Re: PAE into the Official Kernel

#13 2011-07-08 00:07:30

Re: PAE into the Official Kernel

#14 2011-07-08 00:38:29

Re: PAE into the Official Kernel

#15 2011-07-08 09:47:21

Re: PAE into the Official Kernel

#16 2011-07-08 10:47:53

Re: PAE into the Official Kernel

#17 2011-07-08 15:32:25

Re: PAE into the Official Kernel

#18 2011-07-08 21:55:03

Re: PAE into the Official Kernel

#19 2011-07-08 22:19:24

Re: PAE into the Official Kernel

#20 2011-07-08 22:21:12

Re: PAE into the Official Kernel

Board footer