Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 15:42:09 -0500 From: Jason <jason@ec.rr.com> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Found a problem with new source code Message-ID: <3FB149A1.2070105@ec.rr.com> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.20031111123509.jhb@FreeBSD.org> References: <XFMail.20031111123509.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John Baldwin wrote: >On 11-Nov-2003 Jason wrote: > > >>I just wanted to let someone know that my buildworld fails at >>/usr/src/sys/boot/i386/boot2/boot2.c at line 362. I get an undefined >>error for RB_BOOTINFO, by adding #define RB_BOOTINFO 0x1f it worked. >>Also it failed at sendmail.fc or something, I don't use send mail so I >>just did not build it. It looks like someone already reported the >>device apic problem. I just tryed option smp and device apic on my >>single proc athlon, panic on boot unless I chose no apic or is it no >>acpi(?) at boot. >> >> > >No ACPI is what you can choose at boot. Can you post the panic message? > > > >>By the way, why adding the smp options do any good for my machine? I >>mostly care about speed, but it seems it might just make the os unstable >>for me. >> >> > >You can always compile a custom kernel without SMP if you wish. device >apic can be helpful because PCI devices do not have to share interrupts. >Enabling SMP in GENERIC means that SMP machines now work out of the box. >It also means that a sysadmin can use one kernel across both UP and SMP >machines in a hetergeneous environment which can ease system >administration in some cases. > > > I like the idea of not sharing irqs. Can I have apic without smp on? Thanks, Jason
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3FB149A1.2070105>