Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 18:04:33 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 18:04:14 -0500 Received: from ns.suse.de ([213.95.15.193]:16904 "HELO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 18:04:05 -0500 Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 00:04:04 +0100 (CET) From: Dave Jones To: Jeff Golds Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH] AMD SMP capability sanity checking. In-Reply-To: <3BF5952E.E73BB648@resilience.com> Message-ID: 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 On Fri, 16 Nov 2001, Jeff Golds wrote: > So the MP has the SMP capable bit set and the XP does not? Yes. > If so, I'm not convinced this is the correct way to approach this > issue. My reasoning is based on the fact that AMD is not exactly a > impartial source of information. AMD wants to sell more MP chips, so > they can say that only MP chips are SMP capable even if XP chips work > just fine. Whats probably closer to the truth is.. make cpu | smp tests run ok ? ------> No, sell as XP | yes, sell as MP The same as tests are done to test if they can run at 2GHz. If any test fails, its tried as at 1.9Ghz, and 1.8Ghz until the tests pass. One chip yield may run at certain speeds fine, whilst others don't. How is this relevant ? Well, overclockers found that the sample of a yield wasn't true of all cpu silicon from that yield, and that some 1800's run at 1900 with no problem. Just as SOME XP users are reporting problems in SMP whilst some are not. Burning out a fuse to make the switch from MP->XP may affect more than just the cpuid capabilities. The fact is _we don't know_ > The way I'd prefer to see this handled is that things are assumed to > work until proven otherwise. Sort of like the SMP Celeron systems > people have been using: Is there _any_ reason to believe that Celeron's > can't do SMP? I've yet to see a socket 370 dual processormotherboard that I'd put faith in for a mission critical environment. "I had no problems" means _nothing_ when theres as few as 1 other user reporting SMP related problems with the same setup. > P.S. BTW, I don't know all the Athlon steppings, but it sure looks like > _a lot_ of older Athlons/Durons are SMP capable. >From my original message: > > The only older models certified as safe for SMP are. > > Athlon model 6, stepping 0 CPUID = 660 > > Athlon model 6, stepping 1 CPUID = 661 > > Duron model 7, stepping 0 CPUID = 670 Three models. There are considerably more out there. Note, that model 6 isn't really 'old', a thunderbird for eg is model 4. "old" was used relatively in my original mail. regards, Dave. -- | Dave Jones. http://www.codemonkey.org.uk | SuSE Labs - 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/