On Tue, 12 Jul 2005, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * K.R. Foley <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Is this why I have been able to boot the latest versions without the
> > noapic option (and without noticeable keyboard repeat problems) or has
> > it just been dumb luck?
>
> yes, i think it's related - the IO-APIC code is now more robust than
> ever, and that's why any known-broken system would be important to
> re-check.
Just brought the SIS based Xeon box up on -51-28 with CONFIG_IOAPIC_FAST
and without the noapic option, and all is well. On -50-43, noapic was
needed to avoid the spurious interrupt and APIC error on CPU0 messages.
Are there any non-SIS chipsets out there that need the sis_apic_bug
checks? What about IOAPIC_POSTFLUSH?
--ww
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |