Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:12:50 -0800 (PST)
From:      Doug White <dwhite@gumbysoft.com>
To:        Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no>
Cc:        John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
Subject:   Re: APIC-UP related panic
Message-ID:  <20031113091227.H81728@carver.gumbysoft.com>
In-Reply-To: <xzpptfxcvle.fsf@dwp.des.no>
References:  <200311110220.10204@harrymail> <XFMail.20031111113526.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20031112175631.GQ12248@over-yonder.net> <xzpptfxcvle.fsf@dwp.des.no>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Dag-Erling [iso-8859-1] Sm=F8rgrav wrote:

> "Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd@over-yonder.net> writes:
> > > However, if NO_MIXED_MODE works, that is actually the more desirable
> > > way to run your system.
> > How common is the need for this?  Does turning of mixed mode when it's
> > not needed give any real advantages higher up?
>
> NO_MIXED_MODE disables a hack which allow FreeBSD to work with mother-
> boards that lie about how APIC pins are wired.  In general, you always
> want to use NO_MIXED_MODE *except* on hardware that has the bug that
> makes the mixed-mode hack necessary.

Any way we can make this a tunable? :)

--=20
Doug White                    |  FreeBSD: The Power to Serve
dwhite@gumbysoft.com          |  www.FreeBSD.org



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031113091227.H81728>