linux-kernel - Re: Why do so many machines need "noapic"?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070915120824.GA21243@srcf.ucam.org>
Date:	Sat, 15 Sep 2007 13:08:25 +0100
From:	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Ingo Oeser <ioe-lkml@...eria.de>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Why do so many machines need "noapic"?

On Sat, Sep 15, 2007 at 04:08:02AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:

> I believe that about two years ago we broke something which caused quite a
> large number of people to need noapic.  Is that the case with any of your
> machines?  Do you know if they run 2.6.ancient without noapic?

My recollection is that we shifted from "Enable the apic even if the 
BIOS disabled it" to "Only use the apic if the BIOS didn't disable it" 
around that time, which meant that distributions could actually turn on 
apic-on-up support without breaking everything. That might correspond to 
what you're seeing.

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@...f.ucam.org
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/