mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hermann Himmelbauer <dusty@violin.dyndns.org>
To: Karsten Keil <kkeil@suse.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: APIC-Errors+Crashes on GA 586DX, 2.2.17/2.4.3
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 11:22:24 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3AE2A2D0.80388594@violin.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3AE1860A.390E301@violin.dyndns.org> <20010421180435.A22420@pingi.muc.suse.de>

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
-"-"--------------------------------------------------------------

  parent reply	other threads:[~2001-04-22  9:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-04-21 13:07 Hermann Himmelbauer
2001-04-21 16:04 ` Karsten Keil
2001-04-21 23:13   ` Alan Cox
2001-04-22 12:56     ` Hermann Himmelbauer
2001-04-22 13:02       ` Alan Cox
2001-04-22  9:22   ` Hermann Himmelbauer [this message]
2001-04-22 12:23     ` Alan Cox
2001-04-22 20:02     ` Ingo Oeser

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=3AE2A2D0.80388594@violin.dyndns.org \
    --to=dusty@violin.dyndns.org \
    --cc=dusty@strike.wu-wien.ac.at \
    --cc=kkeil@suse.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®