Re: Why do so many machines need "noapic"?

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Matthew Garrett
Date: Saturday, September 15, 2007 - 5:08 am

On Sat, Sep 15, 2007 at 04:08:02AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:


My recollection is that we shifted from "Enable the apic even if the 
BIOS disabled it" to "Only use the apic if the BIOS didn't disable it" 
around that time, which meant that distributions could actually turn on 
apic-on-up support without breaking everything. That might correspond to 
what you're seeing.

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Why do so many machines need "noapic"?, Chuck Ebbert, (Wed Sep 5, 4:30 pm)
Re: Why do so many machines need "noapic"?, Chuck Ebbert, (Fri Sep 7, 12:34 pm)
Re: Why do so many machines need "noapic"?, Prakash Punnoor, (Fri Sep 7, 10:17 pm)
Re: Why do so many machines need "noapic"?, Chuck Ebbert, (Mon Sep 10, 12:12 pm)
Re: Why do so many machines need "noapic"?, Andi Kleen, (Mon Sep 10, 12:44 pm)
Re: Why do so many machines need "noapic"?, Chuck Ebbert, (Mon Sep 10, 4:33 pm)
Re: Why do so many machines need "noapic"?, Chuck Ebbert, (Thu Sep 13, 9:38 am)
Re: Why do so many machines need "noapic"?, Andrew Morton, (Sat Sep 15, 12:39 am)
Re: Why do so many machines need "noapic"?, Ingo Oeser, (Sat Sep 15, 3:58 am)
Re: Why do so many machines need "noapic"?, Andrew Morton, (Sat Sep 15, 4:08 am)
Re: Why do so many machines need "noapic"?, Matthew Garrett, (Sat Sep 15, 5:08 am)
Re: Why do so many machines need "noapic"?, Rafael J. Wysocki, (Sat Sep 15, 11:42 am)
Re: Why do so many machines need "noapic"?, Dave Jones, (Mon Sep 24, 2:32 pm)
Re: Why do so many machines need "noapic"?, Thomas Gleixner, (Tue Sep 25, 2:06 am)
Re: Why do so many machines need "noapic"?, Phillip Susi, (Thu Sep 27, 3:03 pm)