From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <gentoo-dev-return-12697-arch-gentoo-dev=gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org> Received: (qmail 13400 invoked from network); 21 May 2004 10:58:20 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (156.56.111.197) by parrot.ussg.indiana.edu with SMTP; 21 May 2004 10:58:20 +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 1BR7jG-0002S5-Dy for arch-gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 21 May 2004 10:58:18 +0000 Received: (qmail 19810 invoked by uid 89); 21 May 2004 10:58:18 +0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@gentoo.org> List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev-unsubscribe@gentoo.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev-subscribe@gentoo.org> List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org> X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 30032 invoked from network); 21 May 2004 10:58:17 +0000 From: Kevin <gentoo-dev@gnosys.biz> To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 22:46:52 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.94 References: <793F9D20-A427-11D8-AC04-0003939E069A@mac.com> <20040520230808.GA29526@curie-int.orbis-terrarum.net> <87y8nmlmef.fsf@nexus6.musikcheck.dk> In-Reply-To: <87y8nmlmef.fsf@nexus6.musikcheck.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <200405202246.52655.gentoo-dev@gnosys.biz> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] SOLVED: Major MCE problem with SMP on Gentoo kernels X-Archives-Salt: 960363f0-3cfc-4a82-8665-6505db896f19 X-Archives-Hash: a205f390fe9d67727f6ac037174301dd On Thursday 20 May 2004 19:16, Hasse Hagen Johansen wrote: > >>>>> "Robin" =3D=3D Robin H Johnson <robbat2@gentoo.org> writes: > > Robin> If you'd pointed out your cpus were different in the first > Robin> place, that would have been the first thing to change. the > Robin> term is SMP - _Symmetrical_ Multi-Processing on purpose, > Robin> the CPUs need to be identical. I'm surprised it even worked > Robin> to the degree it did. > > He did point it out early on :-) Thanks, Hasse. Glad somebody noticed. :-) Greg/Robin, in my defense, I feel I must point out: It was in my first post (/proc/cpuinfo output), again here: On Thursday 13 May 2004 07:06, Kevin wrote: > Does anyone think that my two CPUs having different stepping levels > could have anything to do with this problem? =C2=A0One is level 7 and the > other 9. and again here: On Tuesday 18 May 2004 04:29, Kevin wrote: > anything like this before and I'm at a loss on how to resolve it. =C2=A0I= 'm > tempted to try replacing one of the CPUs to see if identical stepping > levels (my CPU0 is stepping level 7 and CPU1 is level 9, but they are > otherwise identical) will resolve the problem. Thanks again for all the help, folks, and I too am extremely delighted=20 that I can stay with Gentoo. Over the past 24+ hours as I've been=20 pushing this box to the limit with emerge this and emerge that, upgrading=20 major packages at the snap of a finger, having two different versions of=20 some packages installed in different slots, and building everything from=20 source, it's easy to remember why I struggled so hard to stay with=20 Gentoo. It really does represent a terrific improvement on the standard=20 distros. =2D-=20 =2DKevin -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list