Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
Hi, On Wednesday, 26 of October 2005 03:03, Vladimir Lazarenko wrote: }-- snip --{Let me know if i need to test anything or you want more info.Could you please create a Bugzilla entry for that, and put all of the information you think can be relevant in there (including .config(s), the output(s) of dmesg, the contents of /proc/interrupts etc. for failing configurations)?
Actually, yesterday I was too tired to post a followup, but I'll surely do this now, since at 7am I think I was able to finally find a solution.
As a last step of my playaround, I took 2.6.14-rc5 and decided to give it a go. To my amazement - the box booted up WITH apic, the test raid resync went smoothly, and the box lives till this moment! :)
Happy-happy joy-joy. In the notable differences I saw libata going from 0.10 to 0.12, and sata_nv from 0.6 to 0.9 (actually 0.8 was the version, I guess Jeff forgot to bump the version, since comment says "0.9 Fixed the bug introduced with MCPxx support", but version defined is still 0.8).
Oh man, I can't believe I'm through with this. Thanks everyone very very much for bearing with me all this time.I suppose Bugzilla entry won't be necessary anymore? Or do you still want that for statistical purposes?
Regards, Vladimir
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
- References:
- sata_nv + SMP = broken?
- From: Vladimir Lazarenko <[email protected]>
- Re: sata_nv + SMP = broken?
- From: Vladimir Lazarenko <[email protected]>
- Re: sata_nv + SMP = broken?
- From: Vladimir Lazarenko <[email protected]>
- Re: sata_nv + SMP = broken?
- From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[email protected]>
- sata_nv + SMP = broken?
- Prev by Date: Re: 2.6.14-rc5-rt6 -- False NMI lockup detects
- Next by Date: Re: X unkillable in R state sometimes on startx , /proc/sysrq-trigger T output attached
- Previous by thread: Re: sata_nv + SMP = broken?
- Next by thread: RE: sata_nv + SMP = broken?
- Index(es):
 |