From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24286 invoked from network); 21 May 2004 12:58:21 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (156.56.111.197) by parrot.ussg.indiana.edu with SMTP; 21 May 2004 12:58:21 +0000 Received: from parrot.ussg.indiana.edu ([156.56.111.196] helo=parrot.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BR9bP-0003wx-So for arch-gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 21 May 2004 12:58:20 +0000 Received: (qmail 11973 invoked by uid 89); 21 May 2004 12:58:19 +0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 21937 invoked from network); 21 May 2004 12:58:19 +0000 From: Chris Gianelloni Reply-To: wolf31o2@gentoo.org To: Kevin Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <200405201716.27770.gentoo-dev@gnosys.biz> References: <793F9D20-A427-11D8-AC04-0003939E069A@mac.com> <20040518120228.GE17964%jmglov@jmglov.net> <200405191348.12015.gentoo-dev@gnosys.biz> <200405201716.27770.gentoo-dev@gnosys.biz> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-92QD7dn0HPkKWP0g9jci" Organization: Gentoo Linux Message-Id: <1085144751.25042.31.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 Date: Fri, 21 May 2004 09:05:51 -0400 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] SOLVED: Major MCE problem with SMP on Gentoo kernels X-Archives-Salt: a0f55236-a435-427e-ac25-bc909c86d54f X-Archives-Hash: 13d7c8951a521499365acb884bb71e3f --=-92QD7dn0HPkKWP0g9jci Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 2004-05-20 at 17:16, Kevin wrote: > But the bizarre thing is that I couldn't reproduce this MCE at all using=20 > another distribution on the same (pre-replacement) hardware. Does Gentoo= =20 > push the hardware much harder than other distros? Perhaps because I'm=20 > compiling the code for my particular hardware vice running code that was=20 > built to run on many different sets of hardware (less aggressive CFLAGS=20 > et. al.)? I'm at a loss to explain this. Simply... Yes. You are using, even at -march=3Dpentium3, the MMX and SSE portions of the chip, which may not be used at all on another distribution (compiled -march=3Di586) at all. CFLAGS, as both the Gnome and KDE teams can attest, can make a world of difference on how things come out in the end. As for the memtest86 problem, who knows... ask the memtest86 guys.=20 They'd probably be really interested in your findings. --=20 Chris Gianelloni Developer Games/LiveCD Teams Gentoo Linux Is your power animal a penguin? --=-92QD7dn0HPkKWP0g9jci Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBArf6ukT4lNIS36YERAtzxAJ9rOWjo2t3Oyqi4ay8PcnL5nYfqUwCeLEgk QVILXgq1K6C76Gq7bGMuuJQ= =SiCs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-92QD7dn0HPkKWP0g9jci--