Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264916AbUAVTGu (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jan 2004 14:06:50 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266346AbUAVTGu (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jan 2004 14:06:50 -0500 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:10120 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264916AbUAVTGr (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jan 2004 14:06:47 -0500 Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 11:05:37 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds To: Mikael Pettersson cc: "Pallipadi, Venkatesh" , Karol Kozimor , "Georg C. F. Greve" , "Nakajima, Jun" , Martin Loschwitz , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Brown, Len" , acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: RE: [ACPI] Re: PROBLEM: ACPI freezes 2.6.1 on boot In-Reply-To: <16400.6262.97863.651276@alkaid.it.uu.se> Message-ID: References: <88056F38E9E48644A0F562A38C64FB6082D0B8@scsmsx403.sc.intel.com> <16400.6262.97863.651276@alkaid.it.uu.se> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1502 Lines: 37 On Thu, 22 Jan 2004, Mikael Pettersson wrote: > > To handle both cases the code should do one of those "is intergrated" > tests we alreay have several of in apic.c. I can fix that, but not > until tomorrow. Even then I'd like to hear _why_ it would be a problem to bypass the divider on an external LAPIC. The original patch comes with a message explicitly saying that it was never even tested on such an external LAPIC, and doing a google newsgroup search doesn't find any replies to that post. So it's entirely possible that the code was bogus to begin with, and just never mattered.. I actually have some really old Intel manuals, including one for the i82489DX (actually, it's just one part of a "Pentium Processors and Related Products" manual). And while I see the register definition (and yes, it documents the CLKIN/TMBASE/DIVIDER usage), I don't see anything that actually says that you shouldn't just use CLKIN. Do we have any real reason to care? We calculate the counter value dynamically anyway, so the only "bug" might be that on one of those old i82489DX machines we might report a frequency value that is off by a factor of 16. Which should just make the user really happy ("cool, my APIC is running at 256 MHz!"). Hmm? Linus - 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/