From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266532AbUBLTMT (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Feb 2004 14:12:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266556AbUBLTMT (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Feb 2004 14:12:19 -0500 Received: from cpc3-hitc2-5-0-cust51.lutn.cable.ntl.com ([81.99.82.51]:2702 "EHLO zog.reactivated.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266532AbUBLTMS (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Feb 2004 14:12:18 -0500 Message-ID: <402BA5BD.9070307@reactivated.net> Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 16:11:41 +0000 From: Daniel Drake User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031208 Thunderbird/0.4 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Derek Foreman Cc: Ross Dickson , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jamie Lokier , Ian Kumlien , Jesse Allen , Craig Bradney Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.6, 2.4, Nforce2, Experimental idle halt workaround instead of apic ack delay. References: <200402120122.06362.ross@datscreative.com.au> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Derek Foreman wrote: > Is there a measurable performance loss over not having the patch at all? > Some nforce2 systems work just fine. Is there a way to distinguish > between systems that need it and those that don't? Do you have one of those systems to hand? My betting is on that when you enable APIC/IOAPIC you will see crashes very frequently. This isn't enabled in the default kernel config.. PS, Ross: Again, great work, thanks. I am running the patches you posted in the thread starter (without the previous ones) on 2.6.3-rc2-mm1 without problem. Daniel