Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 05:23:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 05:23:21 -0400 Received: from WARSL401PIP3.highway.telekom.at ([195.3.96.75]:1607 "HELO email02.aon.at") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 05:23:07 -0400 Message-ID: <3AE2A2D0.80388594@violin.dyndns.org> Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 11:22:24 +0200 From: Hermann Himmelbauer Reply-To: dusty@strike.wu-wien.ac.at X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.1 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Karsten Keil CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: APIC-Errors+Crashes on GA 586DX, 2.2.17/2.4.3 In-Reply-To: <3AE1860A.390E301@violin.dyndns.org> <20010421180435.A22420@pingi.muc.suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Karsten Keil wrote: > > I have here the same board with 2*233 MMX and don't see this kind of ISDN > error on recent 2.2 kernels, but got also lot of APIC errors with the > 2.3/2.4, because the APIC errors are only reported in 2.3/4. Right - same behavior here, no APIC errors with 2.2 (as they are not reported). The ISDN error happens very seldom (4 times last year) and is not reproducable - which is not so with the eth0 errors (as eth0 locks at around 500-1000MB while copying data). > > kernel with the "noapic" parameter. The strange thing is that the APIC > > errors are still there, at least there are a lot less than before, > > moreover the system seems slower but at least more stable. BTW, why are > > there still APIC errors although there are no interrupts assigned to > > CPU1 (as seen in /proc/interrupts). > > > > Yes, no APIC means all IRQ are handled by one CPU only, so communication > errors about IRQ events on the APIC bus don't care. Hmmm, so does that mean that those checksum errors have no effect on the stability of my system? > > What I wonder is why linux outputs a line like this (with noapic): > > <4>Intel MultiProcessor Specification v1.1 > > <4> Virtual Wire compatibility mode. > > > > although the board seems to be capable of MPS 1.4 (as there is a Bios > > option "MPS 1.4 for single Processor). > > > > One or 2 years ago I was playing with these options, it seemed that setting > it to 1.1 reduce the error count a little bit, but this maybe a > misinterpretation. How did you do that? The BIOS Option only enables the use of MPS 1.4 for single CPU but I could not find an option for switching between 1.1/1.4. Is there a way to force the Linux kernel to use 1.4? Many thanks for your quick answer! Best Regards, Hermann -- ,_, (O,O) "There is more to life than increasing its speed." ( ) -- Gandhi -"-"-------------------------------------------------------------- - 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/