Prev: HP mobile data protection system driver
Next: Debugging I/O errors?
From: Allen Martin on 19 Oct 2006 12:00
> > I recall quite clearly that Nvidia told us that that
> > acpi_skip_timer_override was necessary in NFORCE2 days. I don't
> > remember the HPET qualification to that statement -- I
> guess that came later.
> > Unfortunately, my NFORCE2 board is dead, so I can't really
> test this out directly.
> >
> > Perhaps checking for PCI_VENDOR_ID_NVIDIA is too broad and the
> > workaround is counter-productive on their newer NVIDIA chip-sets?
> >
> > -Len
> >
> > ps.
> > One (other) problem with this code is that it checks for an HPET
> > table, but doesn't check that the kernel has HPET support enabled.
>
> I think the intent of the HPET check was that the quirk
> wasn't needed on chipsets new enough to have an HPET.
> Unfortunately, even if the chipset has an HPET it isn't
> always enabled by the BIOS.
>
> Clearly this quirk is too broad, it should likely be only
> triggering on known chipset revisions with the bad timer
> overrides and not on all NVIDIA chipsets. What I am wondering
> is how these boards manage to work fine in Windows,
> (presumably) without any such chipset-specific tweaks..

The problem is this workaround doesn't fix a chipset issue, it fixes
incorrect entries in the BIOS ACPI tables. This bug existed in the
NVIDIA reference BIOS for nForce2 and got copied to all customer BIOSes
for nForce2. Even though our reference BIOSes and documentation for all
chipsets since then have the correct interrupt overrides in the ACPI
tables we still see customer BIOSes that get shipped with incorrect
entries that were probably copied from their nForce2 BIOS code.

I believe the HPET check was because the workaround was causing problems
when enabling HPET on systems that support it. Andy probably has more
details on that.

-Allen
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain
confidential information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution
is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by
reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Andi Kleen on 19 Oct 2006 12:20

> The problem is this workaround doesn't fix a chipset issue, it fixes
> incorrect entries in the BIOS ACPI tables. This bug existed in the
> NVIDIA reference BIOS for nForce2 and got copied to all customer BIOSes
> for nForce2. Even though our reference BIOSes and documentation for all
> chipsets since then have the correct interrupt overrides in the ACPI
> tables we still see customer BIOSes that get shipped with incorrect
> entries that were probably copied from their nForce2 BIOS code.

Ah my understanding was that it applied to NF3 and possible NF4 too. Does it
not?

> I believe the HPET check was because the workaround was causing problems
> when enabling HPET on systems that support it. Andy probably has more
> details on that.

Yes it was because NF5 needed it to be disabled. Anyways if I can
get a list of PCI-IDs of chipsets where the reference BIOS had this
issue it can be narrowed to those.

-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Allen Martin on 19 Oct 2006 21:10
> Ah my understanding was that it applied to NF3 and possible
> NF4 too. Does it
> not?
>
> > I believe the HPET check was because the workaround was
> causing problems
> > when enabling HPET on systems that support it. Andy
> probably has more
> > details on that.
>
> Yes it was because NF5 needed it to be disabled. Anyways if I can
> get a list of PCI-IDs of chipsets where the reference BIOS had this
> issue it can be narrowed to those.

Well that's the problem. The issue only existed in the nForce2
reference BIOS (and maybe early in nForce3) but we still occasionally
see shipping customer BIOSes to this day that have this same bug for
nForce5 (like M2NPV referenced in this thread).

Probably what ASUS is doing in the M2NPV BIOS is copying the ACPI tables
from an earlier nForce2 product.

Probably what needs to happen is to make the HPET check more robust and
only return 1 if HPET is present and enabled.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain
confidential information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution
is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by
reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Andi Kleen on 20 Oct 2006 09:10

> Well that's the problem. The issue only existed in the nForce2
> reference BIOS (and maybe early in nForce3) but we still occasionally

Definitely some NF3 too, i've seen it on 64bit boxes.

> see shipping customer BIOSes to this day that have this same bug for
> nForce5 (like M2NPV referenced in this thread).
>
> Probably what ASUS is doing in the M2NPV BIOS is copying the ACPI tables
> from an earlier nForce2 product.

But the timer override is correct or still broken?

> Probably what needs to happen is to make the HPET check more robust and
> only return 1 if HPET is present and enabled.

I think the problem is that those Asus boards also don't have a HPET
table. So even though NF5 has HPET the kernel doesn't know about it
and the heuristic "if HPET then NF5 and timer override ok" breaks.

I still suspect doing a
"if (PCI ID from NF2 or NF3) ignore timer override"
is probably the best solution right now. But I don't have a full
list of PCI-IDs for NF2/NF3. Do you have one?

Ok that might still break the NF4. I assume it never needs any
timer overrides so it might be safe to include it in the PCI-IDs
too.

Or do you have a better proposal?

-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: impulze on 1 Nov 2006 09:30
Andi Kleen wrote:
>> Well that's the problem. The issue only existed in the nForce2
>> reference BIOS (and maybe early in nForce3) but we still occasionally
>>
>
> Definitely some NF3 too, i've seen it on 64bit boxes.
>
>
>> see shipping customer BIOSes to this day that have this same bug for
>> nForce5 (like M2NPV referenced in this thread).
>>
>> Probably what ASUS is doing in the M2NPV BIOS is copying the ACPI tables
>> from an earlier nForce2 product.
>>
>
> But the timer override is correct or still broken?
>
>
>> Probably what needs to happen is to make the HPET check more robust and
>> only return 1 if HPET is present and enabled.
>>
>
> I think the problem is that those Asus boards also don't have a HPET
> table. So even though NF5 has HPET the kernel doesn't know about it
> and the heuristic "if HPET then NF5 and timer override ok" breaks.
>
> I still suspect doing a
> "if (PCI ID from NF2 or NF3) ignore timer override"
> is probably the best solution right now. But I don't have a full
> list of PCI-IDs for NF2/NF3. Do you have one?
>
> Ok that might still break the NF4. I assume it never needs any
> timer overrides so it might be safe to include it in the PCI-IDs
> too.
>
> Or do you have a better proposal?
>
> -Andi
>
Anyway i chatted around the globus and someone also mentioned that my
IRQs for sound and several others are very high. I'm not sure if this is
a board issue or a kernel issue. But since the sound chip on board (hda
intel) is having problems too I guess it's a kernel related thing. I
wonder if this will be fixed in newer versions.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: HP mobile data protection system driver
Next: Debugging I/O errors?