From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 27 22:08:55 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01B59D6D for ; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 22:08:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from bigwig.baldwin.cx (bigknife-pt.tunnel.tserv9.chi1.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f10:75::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D54CD3CA for ; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 22:08:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jhbbsd.localnet (unknown [209.249.190.124]) by bigwig.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2738CB97D; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 17:08:54 -0500 (EST) From: John Baldwin To: matt Subject: Re: CPU0: Local APIC error 0x80 Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 15:27:55 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (FreeBSD/8.2-CBSD-20110714-p25; KDE/4.5.5; amd64; ; ) References: <512A70AC.6050906@gmail.com> <201302271208.39119.jhb@freebsd.org> <512E4DC4.5070608@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <512E4DC4.5070608@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201302271527.55519.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (bigwig.baldwin.cx); Wed, 27 Feb 2013 17:08:54 -0500 (EST) Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 22:08:55 -0000 On Wednesday, February 27, 2013 1:17:40 pm matt wrote: > On 02/27/13 09:08, John Baldwin wrote: > > On Sunday, February 24, 2013 2:57:32 pm matt wrote: > >> What does this mean exactly? > >> > >> Whenever I call/evaluate certain ACPI paths, this gets printed on console. > >> > >> I assume it's a concurrent access issue or something, or perhaps just a > >> bios/uefi problem? > > #define APIC_ESR_ILLEGAL_REGISTER 0x00000080 > > > > It means something wrote to an invalid lapic register. It is probably a bug > > in your BIOS, yes. > > > Not surprising, is there any potential damage from allowing it to continue? Probably not. -- John Baldwin