From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OmEUE-0004s6-3M for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 23:25:30 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 55C5AE063D; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 23:24:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.ukfsn.org (mail.ukfsn.org [77.75.108.10]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28869E063D for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 23:24:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (smtp-filter.ukfsn.org [192.168.54.205]) by mail.ukfsn.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CF7FDEC06 for ; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 00:24:27 +0100 (BST) Received: from mail.ukfsn.org ([192.168.54.25]) by localhost (smtp-filter.ukfsn.org [192.168.54.205]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vfeQBGuCYHqJ for ; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 00:24:27 +0100 (BST) Received: from humphrey.ukfsn.org (unknown [78.32.181.186]) by mail.ukfsn.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30300DEC05 for ; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 00:24:27 +0100 (BST) From: Peter Humphrey Organization: at home To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] dmesg warning about mtrr: type mismatch and allocation failed Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 00:24:25 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.35-gentoo-r1; KDE/4.4.5; x86_64; ; ) References: <20100815232718.GA3864@waltdnes.org> <201008192232.27024.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201008200024.25681.peter@humphrey.ukfsn.org> X-Archives-Salt: 7c104cb9-9c6d-4a54-a2ea-983b53f6abb0 X-Archives-Hash: 854262be87340d735213c87f9e7e5b0d On Thursday 19 August 2010 22:43:19 Paul Hartman wrote: > I think, from the error you posted about originally, it's just > letting you know: "Hey, your MTRR was set wrong and we've changed it > for you". So changing it would simply make the message go away but > not actually perform any differently because you'd be setting it to > the same value it is auto-correcting it to anyway. Or that's how I > understand it, at least. I thought that too, until I looked a bit more closely and saw this: [ 0.608643] mtrr: type mismatch for d0000000,10000000 old: write-back new: write-combining [ 0.608725] [drm] MTRR allocation failed. Graphics performance may suffer. "failed" seems ominous. No wonder Walter asked advice. -- Rgds Peter. Linux Counter 5290, 1994-04-23.