Andre Guibert de Bruet wrote: > > On Sun, 24 Apr 2005, Matthew Sullivan wrote: > >> Andre Guibert de Bruet wrote: >> >>> Processors: APIC ID Version State Family Model Step >>> Flags >>> 0 0x10 BSP, usable 6 2 1 0x0381 >>> 0 0x10 AP, usable 6 8 6 >>> 0x383fbff >>> >>> The APIC IDs here are the same. The flags on the would-be AP are what >>> I would expect for a recent i686. The BSP barely qualify it to be a >>> gen-1 Pentium. I wouldn't trust any of the values being reported. >>> Could you obtain the real identity of these CPUs and confirm that >>> they're not mismatched? The easy way of doing this if your BIOS >>> doesn't post this information is using a Knoppix LiveCD and doing a >>> cat /proc/cpuinfo. >> >> >> Ok can't do the knoppix thing atm, however... >> >> CPU0 -> 866/256/133/1.65v SL47S >> CPU1 -> 866/256/133/1.70v SL48V >> >> Both are shown detected by the BIOS, and both are shown as 866MHz >> 133MHz busses, and 256k cache (as one would expect) >> >>> If both CPUs are reporting the same ID, I can see how we're not >>> launching the second proc; We assume that ID 0 is the BSP and >>> additional processors have different APIC IDs. Is something really >>> borked here? Yep! >> >> >> But the acpidump -t shows 2 different ID's.... > > > I don't know the way our ACPI implementation handles the information > found in the tables well enough to be able to tell you exactly what we > do with the IDs that are found in that dump. That's Nate Lawson's domain > (I added him to the CC-list). I'd like to see the acpidump -t -d > matthew.asl There definitely is a problem when you have identical APIC ids. We already blacklist one version of this BIOS. -- NateReceived on Mon Apr 25 2005 - 04:52:35 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:32 UTC