Re: [Intel-gfx] kernel 3.11.6 general protection fault

2013-12-18 Thread Borislav Petkov
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 09:59:22PM +0100, MPhil. Emanoil Kotsev wrote: > I was able to solve the issue by removing some of the modules I had in > xorg.conf. I noticed that it is not the cpu that is overheating, but > rather the video/graphic card. The area around the "Dell" logo on the > front of

Re: [Intel-gfx] kernel 3.11.6 general protection fault

2013-12-18 Thread MPhil. Emanoil Kotsev
Hi again, sorry for writing after such long time of silence, but I was busy with one project (and family as well) On Sunday 17 November 2013 21:05:46 you wrote: > On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 05:45:18PM +0100, MPhil. Emanoil Kotsev wrote: > > How - new libraries - more exhaustive algorythms - higher

Re: [Intel-gfx] kernel 3.11.6 general protection fault

2013-12-18 Thread MPhil. Emanoil Kotsev
Hi again, sorry for writing after such long time of silence, but I was busy with one project (and family as well) On Sunday 17 November 2013 21:05:46 you wrote: On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 05:45:18PM +0100, MPhil. Emanoil Kotsev wrote: How - new libraries - more exhaustive algorythms - higher

Re: [Intel-gfx] kernel 3.11.6 general protection fault

2013-12-18 Thread Borislav Petkov
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 09:59:22PM +0100, MPhil. Emanoil Kotsev wrote: I was able to solve the issue by removing some of the modules I had in xorg.conf. I noticed that it is not the cpu that is overheating, but rather the video/graphic card. The area around the Dell logo on the front of the

Re: [Intel-gfx] kernel 3.11.6 general protection fault

2013-11-19 Thread MPhil. Emanoil Kotsev
Hi On Sunday 17 November 2013 21:05:46 Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 05:45:18PM +0100, MPhil. Emanoil Kotsev wrote: > > How - new libraries - more exhaustive algorythms - higher cpu usage > > etc. Some of the things M$ is doing on purpose to force you upgrade > > your hardware

Re: [Intel-gfx] kernel 3.11.6 general protection fault

2013-11-19 Thread MPhil. Emanoil Kotsev
Hi On Sunday 17 November 2013 21:05:46 Borislav Petkov wrote: On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 05:45:18PM +0100, MPhil. Emanoil Kotsev wrote: How - new libraries - more exhaustive algorythms - higher cpu usage etc. Some of the things M$ is doing on purpose to force you upgrade your hardware every

Re: [Intel-gfx] kernel 3.11.6 general protection fault

2013-11-17 Thread Borislav Petkov
On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 12:35:16PM +0100, MPhil. Emanoil Kotsev wrote: > After doing all of this I was able to reproduce the issue by > overloading the system with following simple steps: > 1. start a compilation of something (ex. kernel) > 2. run another process hungry application (flashplayer in

Re: [Intel-gfx] kernel 3.11.6 general protection fault

2013-11-17 Thread MPhil. Emanoil Kotsev
Hi I listened to your advise and installed 3.12 kernel (no other modules on top that would taint the kernel like vmware/player). So it turned out I have to enable /proc/acpi (depreciated) and acpi_cpufreq, so that I may have a proper support for cooling and frequency. $ acpi -t Thermal 0: ok,

Re: [Intel-gfx] kernel 3.11.6 general protection fault

2013-11-17 Thread MPhil. Emanoil Kotsev
Hi I listened to your advise and installed 3.12 kernel (no other modules on top that would taint the kernel like vmware/player). So it turned out I have to enable /proc/acpi (depreciated) and acpi_cpufreq, so that I may have a proper support for cooling and frequency. $ acpi -t Thermal 0: ok,

Re: [Intel-gfx] kernel 3.11.6 general protection fault

2013-11-17 Thread Borislav Petkov
On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 12:35:16PM +0100, MPhil. Emanoil Kotsev wrote: After doing all of this I was able to reproduce the issue by overloading the system with following simple steps: 1. start a compilation of something (ex. kernel) 2. run another process hungry application (flashplayer in

Re: [Intel-gfx] kernel 3.11.6 general protection fault

2013-11-13 Thread MPhil. Emanoil Kotsev
Hi On Wednesday 13 November 2013 21:33:19 Borislav Petkov wrote: > Some more suggestions, in addition to Daniel's: > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 09:09:14PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > Nov 13 09:36:21 maistor kernel: [ 40.447271] [ cut > > > here ] > > > Nov 13

Re: [Intel-gfx] kernel 3.11.6 general protection fault

2013-11-13 Thread Borislav Petkov
Some more suggestions, in addition to Daniel's: On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 09:09:14PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > Nov 13 09:36:21 maistor kernel: [ 40.447271] [ cut > > here ] > > Nov 13 09:36:21 maistor kernel: [ 40.447311] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 4142 at > >

Re: [Intel-gfx] kernel 3.11.6 general protection fault

2013-11-13 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 08:58:29PM +0100, MPhil. Emanoil Kotsev wrote: > (sorry it replys automaticaly only to the sender - now added the list) > > What do the intel-gfx people think? > > == original mail follows === > Hi sorry for bothering you once again. > > I noticed most of the

Re: [Intel-gfx] kernel 3.11.6 general protection fault

2013-11-13 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 08:58:29PM +0100, MPhil. Emanoil Kotsev wrote: (sorry it replys automaticaly only to the sender - now added the list) What do the intel-gfx people think? == original mail follows === Hi sorry for bothering you once again. I noticed most of the issues are

Re: [Intel-gfx] kernel 3.11.6 general protection fault

2013-11-13 Thread Borislav Petkov
Some more suggestions, in addition to Daniel's: On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 09:09:14PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: Nov 13 09:36:21 maistor kernel: [ 40.447271] [ cut here ] Nov 13 09:36:21 maistor kernel: [ 40.447311] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 4142 at

Re: [Intel-gfx] kernel 3.11.6 general protection fault

2013-11-13 Thread MPhil. Emanoil Kotsev
Hi On Wednesday 13 November 2013 21:33:19 Borislav Petkov wrote: Some more suggestions, in addition to Daniel's: On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 09:09:14PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: Nov 13 09:36:21 maistor kernel: [ 40.447271] [ cut here ] Nov 13 09:36:21 maistor