Re: [ACPI] acpi problem with nforce motherboards and ethernet

Arjen Verweij
2004-02-06T13:10:41Z

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN, Size: 1938 bytes --]

Here is a preliminary webpage documenting some stuff, it will mature later
on (probably this weekend), but it would be nice to include success
stories of people that have a setup that works for them. If you have one
that you wish to share, please email me.

Typically, tell me about brand, make and bios revision of your board, the
kernel tree you used, patches applied and URLs to those patches so I can
mirror them locally. If you have the patch locally you could just send it,
but my mbox is only 8MB so I would really prefer an URL.

Maybe it is a good idea to include the kernel configs as well, so that we
can get "monkey proof" solutions.

Let me know what you think.

Regards,

Arjen

On Fri, 6 Feb 2004, Craig Bradney wrote:

> On Fri, 2004-02-06 at 12:15, Prakash K. Cheemplavam wrote:
> > Prakash K. Cheemplavam wrote:
> > > Daniel Drake wrote:
> > >
> > >> Prakash K. Cheemplavam wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Ok, then it makes sense, so you are using APIc with CPU Disconnect
> > >>> and Ross' patch. This explains your low idle temps. As I said this
> > >>> config doesn't work for me.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Have you experimented with the new apic_tack boot options in Ross's
> > >> latest patches?
> > >> apic_tack=2 seems to work best for me.
> > >
> > >
> > > Stupid me. I haven't thoruoughly read the text. I have not activated the
> > > patch, so I'll try this. thx for pointing out..
> >
> > OK, I appended apic_tack=2 and yes, it survives several hdparms! Great,
> > so gonna try if it is really stable.Then I can try =1. CPU cooling down.
> > Already at 46°C. :-)
> >
> > Not bad,not bad, though I saw a small performace degration: hdparm gives
> > me 60-61mb/s instead of >62mb/s, but I won't complain. :-)
> >
>
> Ahh yes.. missing the kernel line argument will make a difference. I'm
> running apic_tack=2 as well. From what I remember =2 was the "better"
> patch option if it made your system stable.
>
> Craig
>