Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 12:57:38 -0700 From: "Kevin Oberman" <oberman@es.net> To: Thierry Herbelot <thierry@herbelot.com> Cc: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Subject: Re: systematic panic on an SMP machine for 5.1-Release Message-ID: <20030708195738.CD03D5D07@ptavv.es.net> In-Reply-To: Message from Thierry Herbelot <thierry@herbelot.com> <200307082147.23042.thierry@herbelot.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> From: Thierry Herbelot <thierry@herbelot.com> > Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 21:47:23 +0200 > Sender: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org > > PS : is this an indication of bug in the p-III or in the chipset ? > (ISTR these options could be used to get around unnamed errata of > the p-IV) Terry has never been specific (due to non-disclosure), but adding options DISABLE_PSE to the kernel of my P4 system results in a solid crash when the apm driver probes. (This could be an apm(4) problem, as well.) I wish I knew just when this option might be needed as I run on a wide variety of platforms including P2, K6-3, P3, and P4 with an Athlon coming soon. I'd just as soon only use this option where it's really required. I'm twice shy about it after adding it to the P4 and watching it crash. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: oberman@es.net Phone: +1 510 486-8634
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030708195738.CD03D5D07>