In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Tue, 11 Jul 2006 16:00:55 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > > >> PCI: BIOS Bug: MCFG area at f000 is not E820-reserved
> > > >> PCI: Not using MMCONFIG.
> > > >> PCI: Using configuration type 1
> > > >> ACPI: Interpreter enabled
> > > >>
> > > >> Is there any way
On Mon, Jul 10, 2006 at 10:48:49AM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-07-09 at 13:47 -0400, Brown, Len wrote:
> > >> 2. Onto some more minor warnings:
> > >>
> > >> ACPI: bus type pci registered
> > >> PCI: BIOS Bug: MCFG area at f000 is not E820-reserved
> > >> PCI: Not using MMCON
On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 08:35:38PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 05:22:52AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > ACPI: bus type pci registered
> > > PCI: BIOS Bug: MCFG area at f000 is not E820-reserved
> > > PCI: Not using MMCONFIG.
> > > PCI: Using configuration type 1
> > >
On Sun, 2006-07-09 at 13:47 -0400, Brown, Len wrote:
> >> 2. Onto some more minor warnings:
> >>
> >> ACPI: bus type pci registered
> >> PCI: BIOS Bug: MCFG area at f000 is not E820-reserved
> >> PCI: Not using MMCONFIG.
> >> PCI: Using configuration type 1
> >> ACPI: Interpreter enabled
> >>
On Sun, 09 Jul 2006 23:22:14 +1200 Reuben Farrelly wrote:
> 2. Onto some more minor warnings:
>
> ACPI: bus type pci registered
> PCI: BIOS Bug: MCFG area at f000 is not E820-reserved
> PCI: Not using MMCONFIG.
> PCI: Using configuration type 1
Yes, I have all of those.
> ACPI: Interpreter
On Sun, 9 Jul 2006 10:33:12 -0700
"Randy.Dunlap" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# cat /proc/interrupts
> > CPU0 CPU1
> >0: 258266 0 IO-APIC-edge timer
> >4:355 0 IO-APIC-edge serial
> >6: 5
On Sun, 2006-07-09 at 05:22 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Jul 2006 23:22:14 +1200
> Reuben Farrelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Note also the message midway through about losing some ticks, which if I
> > recall
> > correctly is not new to this -mm release. I'm not sure who to cc a
On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 05:22:52AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > ACPI: bus type pci registered
> > PCI: BIOS Bug: MCFG area at f000 is not E820-reserved
> > PCI: Not using MMCONFIG.
> > PCI: Using configuration type 1
> > ACPI: Interpreter enabled
> >
> > Is there any way to verify that ther
>> 2. Onto some more minor warnings:
>>
>> ACPI: bus type pci registered
>> PCI: BIOS Bug: MCFG area at f000 is not E820-reserved
>> PCI: Not using MMCONFIG.
>> PCI: Using configuration type 1
>> ACPI: Interpreter enabled
>>
>> Is there any way to verify that there really is a BIOS bug
>ther
On Sun, 09 Jul 2006 23:22:14 +1200 Reuben Farrelly wrote:
> On 9/07/2006 9:11 p.m., Andrew Morton wrote:
> > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.18-rc1/2.6.18-rc1-mm1/
> >
> > - We're getting a relatively large number of crash reports co
Alan Cox wrote:
The old drivers/ide code uses much longer delays than the spec for some
ATAPI commands, and it looks as if there is a good reason for doing
so ...
FWIW, the code that ATADRVR (http://www.ata-atapi.com/) uses to issue
commands does something like
write Command registe
On 10/07/2006 12:56 a.m., Alan Cox wrote:
Ar Sul, 2006-07-09 am 05:22 -0700, ysgrifennodd Andrew Morton:
ata5: PATA max UDMA/133 cmd 0x1F0 ctl 0x3F6 bmdma 0x30B0 irq 14
scsi4 : ata_piix
ata5.00: ATAPI, max UDMA/66
ata5.00: configured for UDMA/66
More ATAPI devices getting uppity about mode set
Ar Sul, 2006-07-09 am 05:22 -0700, ysgrifennodd Andrew Morton:
> > ata5: PATA max UDMA/133 cmd 0x1F0 ctl 0x3F6 bmdma 0x30B0 irq 14
> > scsi4 : ata_piix
> > ata5.00: ATAPI, max UDMA/66
> > ata5.00: configured for UDMA/66
More ATAPI devices getting uppity about mode setting.
> John stuff. I suspec
On Sun, 09 Jul 2006 23:22:14 +1200
Reuben Farrelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On 9/07/2006 9:11 p.m., Andrew Morton wrote:
> > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.18-rc1/2.6.18-rc1-mm1/
> >
> > - We're getting a re
On 9/07/2006 9:11 p.m., Andrew Morton wrote:
ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.18-rc1/2.6.18-rc1-mm1/
- We're getting a relatively large number of crash reports coming out of the
core sysfs/kobject/driver/bus code, and they're all really hard t
15 matches
Mail list logo