From owner-freebsd-stable Mon Feb 12 6:56:16 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from highland.isltd.insignia.com (highland.isltd.insignia.com [195.217.222.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4420737B4EC for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 06:56:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from wolf.isltd.insignia.com (wolf-c1.isltd.insignia.com [193.112.16.10]) by highland.isltd.insignia.com (8.11.2/8.11.2/check_local4.2) with ESMTP id f1CEu8I41081 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 14:56:08 GMT Received: (from daemon@localhost) by wolf.isltd.insignia.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA07293 for freebsd-stable@freebsd.org; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 14:56:08 GMT From: freebsd-stable-local@insignia.com To: Pete French Subject: Re: Constantly crashing SMP box Date: 12 Feb 2001 14:56:05 -0000 Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG According to the official SMP specification from Intel this should not mandatory, according to experiences from an SMP designer, this is absolutely recommended. YMMV TfH PS : the serial numbers of the Celerons of my BP6 are in exact sequence Pete French on 12/02/2001 15:27:13 To: dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie, Thierry HERBELOT/FR/ALCATEL@ALCATEL cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG, sketchy@netcraft.com Subject: Re: Constantly crashing SMP box > furthermore, you better have SMP processors with the same stepping > number (if your processors came from two different boxes, the CPUs > may have come from different production batches) Is this an absolute necessity ? I'm thinking of buying a 2nd CPU to run -stable on, but getting a matching one will be hard ! -pete. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message