From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 11:30:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 11:30:37 -0400 Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net ([198.5.241.38]:60818 "EHLO cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 11:30:23 -0400 Message-ID: <3B38A988.A576028B@uu.net> Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 11:26:00 -0400 From: Alex Deucher Organization: UUNET X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alan Cox CC: joeja@mindspring.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: AMD thunderbird oops In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org What's weird though is that it is rock solid as long as I don't use athlon optimizations. I'm not sure how much of a speed improvement they provide, but everything's fine with i686, so I can't complain, besides I doubt I can return the board at this point anyway. BTW, which would be better with an athlon, k6 or i686 optimization? I've heard i686 is faster, but I've never really looked into it too much myself. Thanks, Alex Alan Cox wrote: > > > I get oopses too when I use kernels compiled for athlon on my redhat > > 7.1, athlon 850 system. runs rock solid when I compile for i686. I > > assumed the athlon optimizations in the kernel were broken, or gcc's > > athlon optimization was, as I seem to recall some discussion of this a > > while back on the LKML. > > Most IWILL K266 people report this. Those who swapped them for other boards > mostly report the problem then going away. Yes it could be a bug we trigger > that by chance the IWILL boards show up more than others but I'm sceptical > > Alan