Re: Why do so many machines need "noapic"?

[Phillip Susi <psusi@cfl.rr.com>]

Dave Jones wrote:
> If memory serves correctly, that was circa 2.6.10, back in these commits..
>
> commit a068ea13d1db406e15c346e93530343f6e70184c
> Author: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
> Date:   Sun Oct 10 05:21:08 2004 -0400
>
>     [ACPI] If BIOS disabled the LAPIC, believe it by default.
>     "lapic" is available to force enabling the LAPIC
>     in the event you know more than your BIOS vendor.
>     http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3238
>
> commit 2fcfece90db9643b6f30a7ad343898a2871e6a81
> Author: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
> Date:   Sat Oct 9 20:12:45 2004 -0400
>
>     [ACPI] Don't enable LAPIC when the BIOS disabled it.
>     Doing so apparently breaks every Dell on Earth.
>     http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3238
>
>
> But those changes relate to the local APIC, which 'noapic' shouldn't
> have any effect on should it ?

If the LAPIC is disabled, then you CAN'T use the IO-APIC right?  So then
wouldn't the noapic option have no effects since the apic is already
disabled?



-
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/