Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 11:16:05 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua>, freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 5.4=>6.1 regression: nforce2 vs. APIC [+fix] Message-ID: <200605191116.06248.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <446DD5EB.6030300@icyb.net.ua> References: <446DD5EB.6030300@icyb.net.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday 19 May 2006 10:27, Andriy Gapon wrote: > [Disclaimer, just in case: I do mean APIC, not ACPI] > > This is a good lesson for me for not trying any RCs or BETAs in due time. > > Short description of my system: nforce2 based motherboard NF-7 v2 with > the latest BIOS (v2.7), CPU is Athlon XP. > > ... > > Based on that info and the linux patch in that thread I came up with the > following PCI fixup. Now I am running 6.1 with both APIC and "C1 > disconnect" enabled for 2 days without any problems. Good find! The patch looks good. I've modified it slight to expand the comment and to make it more paranoid and only trigger for bus/slot/function 0/0/0 like the post mentions along with a minor tweak to the printf. Can you test to make sure I didn't break anything in the process? -- John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200605191116.06248.jhb>