From: Josh McKinney <forming@charter.net>
To: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: A7N8X (Deluxe) Madness
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 21:55:07 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20031112025507.GA18073@forming> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <frodoid.frodo.87r80eznz9.fsf@usenet.frodoid.org>
I thought I would share some of my experiences with the ASUS A7N8X. I
just got this mobo last week, so I haven't had a whole lot of time with
it nor do I have anything on the SATA controller. 2.6.0-test9-mm2 would
crash hard with any IDE activity with APIC and IO-APIC enabled.
recompiling the kernel without APIC or IO-APIC but with APCI still
enabled and and *no* pci=noacpi on the command line the board is
perfectly stable and I see no performance hit with the IDE disks. Here
is my /proc/interrupts with the working config:
$ cat /proc/interrupts
CPU0
0: 90624732 XT-PIC timer
1: 21404 XT-PIC i8042
2: 0 XT-PIC cascade
5: 35712 XT-PIC ohci_hcd
8: 1 XT-PIC rtc
9: 0 XT-PIC acpi
11: 6930402 XT-PIC nvidia
12: 114340 XT-PIC ehci_hcd, ohci_hcd, eth0, NVidia
nForce2
14: 887 XT-PIC ide0
15: 133930 XT-PIC ide1
NMI: 0
ERR: 0
If there is anything else I could test or anymore info I could give to
help track down this problem I would be more than happy to help. I am
planning on buying some SATA drives soon and might change my mind if
this issue isn't cleared up.
Thanks
On approximately Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 08:47:38PM +0100, Julien Oster wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> seriously, I'm pretty fed up with it.
>
> I have an ASUS A7N8X Deluxe mainboard. Yeah, right, that thing causing
> serious trouble. I'm getting hard lockups all the time. No panic, no
> message, no sysrq, no blinking cursor in the framebuffer. Gone for good.
>
> I went through the mailing list archive and tried out many
> things. However, this is how far I got:
>
> With 2.6.0-test9, the machine locks up while booting or shortly
> after. This is clearly connected to high IDE (PATA) load, since it
> locks up with a 100% chance while doing an fsck. If I managed booting
> it (which means, if it doesn't do an fsck while booting) I can lock it
> up immediately by doing a hdparm -t /dev/hda. I don't know what SATA
> load would do on that kernel, I never got that far.
>
> Specifying "noapic nolapic acpi=off noacpi=off" helps, I got no
> lockups. However, I don't like this, because of the performance flaws
> (I'll talk about this later).
>
> So, one might suspect: Something between APIC or ACPI (or both) and
> the IDE controller broken, nothing to fix there, that's life. Right?
> Wrong. Because:
>
> With 2.4.22-ac4 it actually works *better*. Not absolutely good, but
> better. I can achieve uptimes up to *several days*. However, it still
> locks up. Sometimes after several days, sometimes some minutes after
> booting. But basically I can actually use my computer with
> 2.4.22-ac4. Strangely, the lockups don't seem to be connected to IDE
> load with that kernel. When the machine locks up, it simply does,
> without any appearent cause. I can create as many CPU, disk, network
> or whatever load I want. All goes fine. Then I leave the computer, the
> machine staying idle, I come back and it's crashed. I even have the
> impression, that it only crashes when it has no load at all. Clearly
> spoken, I can't really remember that it locked up when I was sitting
> in front of the computer. Moving the mouse or typing things seems to
> create enough load to actually keep it from locking up?!
>
> So, things are totally different between 2.6.0-test9 and
> 2.4.22-ac4. 2.6.0-test9 doesn't like the slightest IDE load with that
> mainboard at all. 2.4.22-ac4 doesn't care, runs for hours or for days
> and then locks up when it just gets bored or something similar.
>
> The solution might look simple: why don't I just use 2.6.0-test9 with
> the enormous "noapic nolapic acpi=off pci=noacpi" command line?
> Because then, my SATA performance really is a pain compared to what I
> can get with 2.4.22-ac4. A simple example with hdparm -t (I tried
> other things, also, but this already gives a nice example): with
> 2.4.22-ac4 I get amazing 100 to 110 MB/s on the SATA RAID. With
> 2.6.0-test9 and the nasty command line, I get at most 40MB/s. To feel
> the difference, I just have to fire up Oracle and let it do some I/O
> expensive things.
>
> Has nobody an idea what it could be? That's just strange, both kernels
> are unstable on that mainboard, but the one is much more stable while
> locking up in completely different situations.
>
> If that continues like that, I'll begin to feel the urge of hunting
> ASUS and NVIDIA down.
>
> Well, I hope I could give you some worthy information.
>
> In great despair,
> Julien
> -
> 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/
--
Josh McKinney | Webmaster: http://joshandangie.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| They that can give up essential liberty
Linux, the choice -o) | to obtain a little temporary safety deserve
of the GNU generation /\ | neither liberty or safety.
_\_v | -Benjamin Franklin
prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-11-12 2:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-11-11 19:47 A7N8X (Deluxe) Madness Julien Oster
2003-11-11 19:55 ` Maciej Zenczykowski
2003-11-11 20:18 ` Julien Oster
2003-11-11 20:25 ` Maciej Zenczykowski
2003-11-11 20:09 ` Erik Andersen
2003-11-11 20:24 ` Julien Oster
2003-11-11 21:09 ` Erik Andersen
2003-11-11 21:31 ` Julien Oster
2003-11-12 2:55 ` Josh McKinney [this message]
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=20031112025507.GA18073@forming \
--to=forming@charter.net \
--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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.