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    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans