On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 06:39:17PM +0100, Prakash Punnoor wrote: > On the day of Friday 08 February 2008 Andi Kleen hast written: > > On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 04:13:35PM +0100, Prakash Punnoor wrote: > > > > Sorry, I meant the opposite. I needed the acpi_skip_timer_override kernel > > > parameter for nforce2, thus no override. So this chipset is missing here. > > > At least I remember that my nforce2 needed the skipping, > > > > I hope you remember correctly and mean it this time. It would be better > > if you could double check. > > Yes, confirmed. timer w/o the skipping stays XT-PIC on nforce2.
Confirmed what? Did you test my patch on both machines? What was the result? > lspci -n: Please always send lspci without -n too; I hate looking up hex codes by hand when a computer can do that for me. > 02:00.0 0300: 10de:0281 (rev a1) > > > I'm a little sceptical because we had this patch in OpenSUSE 10.3 > > and I didn't think there were complaints from NF2 users. > > With the changes you're requesting it turns from something > > very well tested into something experimental. > > Well, even w/o the skipping my nforce2 system wasn't unstable, AFAIK. So I > don't think just because of the XT-PIC entry people would complain. Timer override only does something in APIC mode and when you see XT-PIC in /proc/interrupts then you're not in APIC mode. All these patches are a no-op in this state. > See why I don't want the quirk to be applied more than needed? *NOT* applying > the quirk on nforce2 didn't cause any obvious side effects. APPLYING to mcp51 > causes hard lock-ups. Can you please just test the patches instead of speculating what they might do or not do? -Andi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
