Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 15:37:24 -0500 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: CeDeROM <cederom@tlen.pl> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 9.1-RELEASE AMD64 crash under VBox 4.2.6 when IO APIC is disabled Message-ID: <201302141537.24701.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <CAFYkXjnv_7M-s4cGTeuNZMtF-XANnJ=bb%2BgnoX_0=-G3y9xPYg@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAFYkXjknuDPr=FYxkj9eYDsSRh_kUa=9ubyDR=84=hWi85RTiw@mail.gmail.com> <201302131048.06370.jhb@freebsd.org> <CAFYkXjnv_7M-s4cGTeuNZMtF-XANnJ=bb%2BgnoX_0=-G3y9xPYg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday, February 13, 2013 6:56:06 pm CeDeROM wrote: > On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 4:48 PM, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote: > >> The simple answer that I have deduced is that APIC is MANDATORY for > >> AMD64 machines and they won't run otherwise? This is why generic AMD64 > >> install fails when no APIC is enabled in the VBox? > > > > No, it is not quite like that. x86 machines have two entirely different > > sets of interrupt controllers. (...) > > Hello John :-) Things now are more clear to me, thank you for your > extensive explanation!! :-) I am wondering in that case if it wouldn't > be a good idea to put atpci (old x86 IRQ handler) in the GENERIC > configuration, or at least in the default installer kernel, so it is a > safe fallback for a AMD64 machines with no APIC support, as for > example VBox with APIC disabled..? Is atpic removed on purpose so it > enforces use of new APIC and so better performance? Real hardware should always use device apic on amd64. Even for a VM you should prefer apic. That is, I think you should just enable APIC when using VBox. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201302141537.24701.jhb>