lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Nov]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: NForce2 pseudoscience stability testing (2.6.0-test11)
    Julien Oster wrote:
    > ross.alexander@uk.neceur.com writes:
    >>I have been test various kernel parameter combinations to test stability.
    >
    >
    > Thanks, that's quite a nice overview.
    >
    > But something seems strange:
    >
    >
    >>APIC,LAPIC S
    >>PREM,APIC,LAPIC S
    >
    >
    > Does those two lines mean, that using ACPI, APIC and local APIC
    > enabled is stable, as long as your kernel is not an SMP kernel? If
    > yes, then I can't confirm this. I run strictly non-SMP kernels and
    > they always crash if APIC (or local APIC?) is enabled.

    I also have the same problem on an Abit NF7-S V2.0: I think I tested
    (non-SMP always) with kernel 2.6-test8 last: With Apic (and/or local
    apic) system locks up. Without it is now rock-solid with ACPI. But it
    seems to be a BIOS issue, as Windows locks up with APIC use, as well.
    Well I am using latest BIOS and hope that Abit gets this fixed...

    BTW, why would someone want an SMP kernel for a 1-CPU system?

    Prakash

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:58    [W:0.021 / U:180.144 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site