From: John Sigler <linux.kernel@free.fr>
To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: BIOS implementors disabling the LAPIC
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 14:32:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46AF2BF8.3000601@free.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64N.0707311119350.16158@blysk.ds.pg.gda.pl>
Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> John Sigler wrote:
>
>> As far as I understand, the Local APIC was integrated directly to the CPU
>> 12-15 years ago. Why would a BIOS implementor choose to disable it?
>
> Because they are lazy/incapable/out-of-time/select-your-favourite-excuse.
> For the chip to work you have to provide some minimal support in the
> firmware, in particular for the trickier paths of execution in the system
> management mode. The system still works with the Local APIC disabled, so
> why bother?
The motherboard manufacturer (well, their level 1 support, anyway) told
me I could "safely enable the LAPIC". If it is safe to enable the LAPIC,
then why are they disabling it in the BIOS? (They weren't able to tell
me whether their BIOS triggers SMIs or not...)
Is this a "either works or doesn't" situation where hell should break
loose if I try to enable the LAPIC and it's not supported by the
motherboard, or is this a "you will silently lose data at the worst
possible time" situation?
>> (And what does it mean to "disable" the LAPIC?)
>
> The LINT0 and LINT1 inputs of the APIC are routed straight to the INT and
> NMI inputs of the CPU respectively and the rest of the APIC logic becomes
> inactive (tri-stated, etc.).
If that were the case, then I could not enable the LAPIC and have NMIs
work, right?
Regards.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-07-31 12:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-07-31 8:06 BIOS implementors disabling the LAPIC John Sigler
2007-07-31 10:27 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2007-07-31 12:32 ` John Sigler [this message]
2007-07-31 12:55 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-07-31 12:53 Gregory Haskins
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=46AF2BF8.3000601@free.fr \
--to=linux.kernel@free.fr \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=macro@linux-mips.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.