On the day of Saturday 09 February 2008 Gene Heskett hast written:
quoted text
> On Saturday 09 February 2008, Prakash Punnoor wrote:
> >On the day of Saturday 09 February 2008 Gene Heskett hast written:
> >> This has killed me both at boot time twice, once before NASH was
> >> running, and several times when uptimes were a day plus, but has never
> >> reappeared since the first time I used the acpi_user_timer_override
> >> argument, and this includes several boots without it including 2
> >> complete, 2 or 3 minute power downs.
> >
> >Are you saying that on your nforce2 you need the override
> >(acpi_use_timer_override) to have a stable system? Because that would be
> > in contrast to all previous findings regarding nforce2. Could you provi=
de
quoted text
> >
> >cat /proc/interrupts
> >lspci
> >lspci -n
>
> Currently booted with it, uptime 38 hours, only diff visible is in dmesg =
as
quoted text
> has been posted here in another thread.
>
> [root@coyote ~]# cat /proc/interrupts
>            CPU0
>   0:        869    XT-PIC-XT        timer
>   1:         18   IO-APIC-edge      i8042

Thanks for providing the info. According to the IDs your and my board are=20
quite alike. If you don't pass acpi_use_timer_override to vanilla kernel,=20
does your timer get connected to IO-APIC? Ie:

           CPU0
  0:      47834   IO-APIC-edge      timer

In this mode, is your board stable? I never run my hw longer than 10h, so I=
=20
cannot say anything about long-term stability, but lately my nforce2 didn't=
=20
make any troubles and (when it did, it usally was related to PSU). I am=20
skipping the override, ie. my timer is connected to IO-APIC.

If in the latter mode your hw is instable, we have a problem...
=2D-=20
(=C2=B0=3D                 =3D=C2=B0)
//\ Prakash Punnoor /\\
V_/                 \_V