On Sun, Mar 26, 2006 at 11:04:05PM -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> >>>>> "DJ" == Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> DJ> really ? I was under the impression that all the SMP capable C3's
> DJ> were Nehemiah cores, which are 686 capable.
> > cat /proc/cpuinfo
> processor : 0
> vendor_id : CentaurHauls
> cpu family : 6
> model : 9
> model name : VIA Nehemiah
> stepping : 10
> cpu MHz : 997.370
> cache size : 64 KB
> fdiv_bug : no
> hlt_bug : no
> f00f_bug : no
> coma_bug : no
> fpu : yes
> fpu_exception : yes
> cpuid level : 1
> wp : yes
> flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr cx8 apic mtrr pge cmov pat
> mmx fxsr sse rng rng_en ace ace_en
> bogomips : 1998.41
> (plus another identical CPU)
ok, that's definitly 686 class (complete with the optional cmov extension).
> FC5 doesn't install a SMP kernel on this machine
sounds like an installer bug.
> , and installing the
> shipped SMP kernel results in something that spews a few thousand
> identical messages about unhandled interrupts and then reboots.
that'll be a kernel bug ;)
> I'll be happy to provide more info if there's any data you'd like for me to
> I built 2.6.16-1.2070_FC5 with a custom i586-smp kernel that sets
> CONFIG_MVIAC3_2 and it runs fine.
I'll see if I can figure out what could be causing the difference
(and try and get hold of a similar system to reproduce on)
> DJ> that should be it, unless I've forgotten something.
> Yep, that worked. (I eventually figured it out during the mailing
> list delay.) Is there any possibility of getting some of these
> alternate kernels into the base SRPM? It might be useful to have them
> built for extras.
I'd rather the 686-smp kernel 'just worked'.
fedora-devel-list mailing list