on 21/07/2010 03:57 Markus Gebert said the following: > Another thing though: Today I compared verbose boot output from 8-stable and > the current box. I saw that the ioapic sets up IRQ routing differently on > these two systems although the hardware is the same. This seemed not so > interesting at first, but then I noticed that 8-stable sets up two routes (to > lapic0 and lapic2, or sometimes lapic3) for IRQ58 (mpt0), while current only > uses one route (to lapic0).
My understanding that it's not "two routes", but re-routing. During early boot all interrupts are bound to BSP; later, when APs become online, the interrupts are re-distributed among available CPUs. > I used 'cpuset -c -l 0 -x 58' in an attempt to make my 8-stable box behave > like the one running current. Indeed, this seems to have changed IRQ58 to be > routed to lapic0 only. And the box was running for hours without showing the > symptoms. > > I just checked boot verbose outpout of my 8-stable box again (booted with > machdep.lapic_allclocks=0 as mentioned above). And now it seems to have set > up IRQ routes just like the current box (one route for IRQ58 to lapic0). Not sure how to interpret this properly. One possibility is a hardware problem where interrupt message route between ioapic2 and CPU to which lapic3 belongs is flaky. Perhaps, this might be a FreeBSD problem: it could be that the system somehow tells to not set up such routes, but we don't listen. But this is far fetched. -- Andriy Gapon _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
