[lkml]   [2003]   [Nov]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: A7N8X (Deluxe) Madness
    I thought I would share some of my experiences with the ASUS A7N8X.  I
    just got this mobo last week, so I haven't had a whole lot of time with
    it nor do I have anything on the SATA controller. 2.6.0-test9-mm2 would
    crash hard with any IDE activity with APIC and IO-APIC enabled.
    recompiling the kernel without APIC or IO-APIC but with APCI still
    enabled and and *no* pci=noacpi on the command line the board is
    perfectly stable and I see no performance hit with the IDE disks. Here
    is my /proc/interrupts with the working config:

    $ cat /proc/interrupts
    0: 90624732 XT-PIC timer
    1: 21404 XT-PIC i8042
    2: 0 XT-PIC cascade
    5: 35712 XT-PIC ohci_hcd
    8: 1 XT-PIC rtc
    9: 0 XT-PIC acpi
    11: 6930402 XT-PIC nvidia
    12: 114340 XT-PIC ehci_hcd, ohci_hcd, eth0, NVidia
    14: 887 XT-PIC ide0
    15: 133930 XT-PIC ide1
    NMI: 0
    ERR: 0

    If there is anything else I could test or anymore info I could give to
    help track down this problem I would be more than happy to help. I am
    planning on buying some SATA drives soon and might change my mind if
    this issue isn't cleared up.


    On approximately Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 08:47:38PM +0100, Julien Oster wrote:
    > Hello,
    > seriously, I'm pretty fed up with it.
    > I have an ASUS A7N8X Deluxe mainboard. Yeah, right, that thing causing
    > serious trouble. I'm getting hard lockups all the time. No panic, no
    > message, no sysrq, no blinking cursor in the framebuffer. Gone for good.
    > I went through the mailing list archive and tried out many
    > things. However, this is how far I got:
    > With 2.6.0-test9, the machine locks up while booting or shortly
    > after. This is clearly connected to high IDE (PATA) load, since it
    > locks up with a 100% chance while doing an fsck. If I managed booting
    > it (which means, if it doesn't do an fsck while booting) I can lock it
    > up immediately by doing a hdparm -t /dev/hda. I don't know what SATA
    > load would do on that kernel, I never got that far.
    > Specifying "noapic nolapic acpi=off noacpi=off" helps, I got no
    > lockups. However, I don't like this, because of the performance flaws
    > (I'll talk about this later).
    > So, one might suspect: Something between APIC or ACPI (or both) and
    > the IDE controller broken, nothing to fix there, that's life. Right?
    > Wrong. Because:
    > With 2.4.22-ac4 it actually works *better*. Not absolutely good, but
    > better. I can achieve uptimes up to *several days*. However, it still
    > locks up. Sometimes after several days, sometimes some minutes after
    > booting. But basically I can actually use my computer with
    > 2.4.22-ac4. Strangely, the lockups don't seem to be connected to IDE
    > load with that kernel. When the machine locks up, it simply does,
    > without any appearent cause. I can create as many CPU, disk, network
    > or whatever load I want. All goes fine. Then I leave the computer, the
    > machine staying idle, I come back and it's crashed. I even have the
    > impression, that it only crashes when it has no load at all. Clearly
    > spoken, I can't really remember that it locked up when I was sitting
    > in front of the computer. Moving the mouse or typing things seems to
    > create enough load to actually keep it from locking up?!
    > So, things are totally different between 2.6.0-test9 and
    > 2.4.22-ac4. 2.6.0-test9 doesn't like the slightest IDE load with that
    > mainboard at all. 2.4.22-ac4 doesn't care, runs for hours or for days
    > and then locks up when it just gets bored or something similar.
    > The solution might look simple: why don't I just use 2.6.0-test9 with
    > the enormous "noapic nolapic acpi=off pci=noacpi" command line?
    > Because then, my SATA performance really is a pain compared to what I
    > can get with 2.4.22-ac4. A simple example with hdparm -t (I tried
    > other things, also, but this already gives a nice example): with
    > 2.4.22-ac4 I get amazing 100 to 110 MB/s on the SATA RAID. With
    > 2.6.0-test9 and the nasty command line, I get at most 40MB/s. To feel
    > the difference, I just have to fire up Oracle and let it do some I/O
    > expensive things.
    > Has nobody an idea what it could be? That's just strange, both kernels
    > are unstable on that mainboard, but the one is much more stable while
    > locking up in completely different situations.
    > If that continues like that, I'll begin to feel the urge of hunting
    > ASUS and NVIDIA down.
    > Well, I hope I could give you some worthy information.
    > In great despair,
    > Julien
    > -
    > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    > the body of a message to
    > More majordomo info at
    > Please read the FAQ at

    Josh McKinney | Webmaster:
    | They that can give up essential liberty
    Linux, the choice -o) | to obtain a little temporary safety deserve
    of the GNU generation /\ | neither liberty or safety.
    _\_v | -Benjamin Franklin
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:58    [W:0.028 / U:54.372 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site