Arthur Machlas put forth on 7/30/2010 9:04 AM:
>> BTW, I'm curious as to your motivations for this. Is this basically a
>> "Windows can do 800MHz, so $deity dammit, Linux should be able to do it as
>> well!" thing?
>
> Not as such. More like a my processor is supposed to scale from 800Mhz
> to 1
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Christian Jaeger wrote:
> How do you read the possible cpu frequencies?
>
> Your kernel needs cpufreq support and ondemand, powersave, etc.
> governors; check with
> cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_available_frequencies
> cat /sys/devices/system/cp
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 12:52 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Arthur Machlas put forth on 7/29/2010 12:01 PM:
>
>> Things are running nicely, but the problem I hoped
>> to resolve hasn't been. Namely, the lowest frequency my cpu can reach
>> is 1Ghz... instead of the 800Mhz that it reaches on windows a
Arthur Machlas put forth on 7/29/2010 12:01 PM:
> Things are running nicely, but the problem I hoped
> to resolve hasn't been. Namely, the lowest frequency my cpu can reach
> is 1Ghz... instead of the 800Mhz that it reaches on windows and in the
> spec sheets.
>
> Advice on how to proceed from he
How do you read the possible cpu frequencies?
Your kernel needs cpufreq support and ondemand, powersave, etc.
governors; check with
cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_available_frequencies
cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_available_governors
cat /sys/devices/system/cp
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 5:46 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Arthur Machlas put forth on 7/28/2010 11:14 PM:
> In "make menuconfig":
>
> These last two are probably the reason for the "unknown", especially given
> you're running 2.6.34 which has all the CPU models currently on the market.
Probably ju
Arthur Machlas put forth on 7/28/2010 11:14 PM:
> Greetings,
>
> According to the spec sheet on the Atom N450 it has a single core,
> though it does support two threads. However, linuxinfo (replaces
> cpuinfo I suppose) says two unknown processors.
Your kernel doesn't either doesn't support CPU_I
Greetings,
According to the spec sheet on the Atom N450 it has a single core,
though it does support two threads. However, linuxinfo (replaces
cpuinfo I suppose) says two unknown processors.
r...@hpm210:/home/arthur/Misc/Linux/2.6.34-1# linuxinfo
Linux HPm210 2.6.32-5-686 #1 SMP Tue Jun 1 04:59:4
>Linux supports "smp-alternatives" since 2.6.17. This
>means, that additional processors can be added
>dynamically while the boot process of the kernel.
>Or in other words: all Debians kernel images do
support >smp (i386,powerpc and some other archs).
Thanks for the info.
can a procesor be stop
Enrique Morfin wrote:
> Does the package linux-image-2.6.18-1-686-bigmem is
> smp?
Linux supports "smp-alternatives" since 2.6.17. This means, that
additional processors can be added dynamically while the boot process of
the kernel.
Or in other words: all Debians kernel images do support smp (i38
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Greg Madden wrote:
[[snip]]
>
> I don't have an answer.I thought ACPI was for power management, esp
> laptops, a heavily used server doesn't seem to me to need power
> management. I have a smp PIII Gz that gives me fits, IRQ allocation on
> the pci sl
On 10/5/06, Greg Madden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I don't have an answer.I thought ACPI was for power management, esp
laptops, a heavily used server doesn't seem to me to need power
management. I have a smp PIII Gz that gives me fits, IRQ allocation on
the pci slots. This is a APIC issue, and t
On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:54:39 +1300
Matt Parlane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/5/06, Roberto C. Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > I have a dual Xeon machine that was running fine on all four
> > > cores, but then I started getting some filesystem corruption
> > > because of dodgy RAI
On 10/5/06, Roberto C. Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a dual Xeon machine that was running fine on all four cores,
> but then I started getting some filesystem corruption because of dodgy
> RAID drivers. I disabled ACPI, which fixed this, but now I am down to
> running on two cores
On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 03:34:38PM +1300, Matt Parlane wrote:
> Hi all...
>
> I have a dual Xeon machine that was running fine on all four cores,
> but then I started getting some filesystem corruption because of dodgy
> RAID drivers. I disabled ACPI, which fixed this, but now I am down to
> runn
El Jueves, 18 de Mayo de 2006 20:25, escribió:
Thank you,
I thought that I had already answered to the list. It is a reported bug of
xorg and the ati driver. I had to disable dri, I do not what is that for.
--
http://antares.sip.ucm.es/~luis
pgpeZHX1EpOZt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Luis Fernando Llana Díaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In short, I have to disable DRI, although I do not what it is.
Usually if you don't know what it is you don't need it :) Seriously now,
it is Direct Rendering Infrastructure and it has to do with hardware 3d
acceleration.
HTH
Andrei
--
To
El Lunes, 15 de Mayo de 2006 21:01, Grant Thomas escribió:
> On 5/13/06, Luis Fernando Llana Díaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Usually after you install a new kernel through apt-get or aptitude,
> > > your boot loader will get updated to show the new kernel and the old
> > > kernel. At least it
El Sábado, 13 de Mayo de 2006 04:53, Grant Thomas escribió:
> On 5/12/06, Luis Fernando Llana Díaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hello,
> > I have just installed a new debian box (etch version). Everything runs
> > perfect until I have installed a smp kernel, I have tried
> > 2.6.15-1-686-smp an
On 5/12/06, Luis Fernando Llana Díaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
I have just installed a new debian box (etch version). Everything runs
perfect until I have installed a smp kernel, I have tried 2.6.15-1-686-smp
and 2.6.16-1-smp. It has a hyperthreading (or something similar) pentium and
i
On Monday 11 July 2005 03:47 pm, Angelo R. Rossi wrote:
> http://www.debian.org/distrib/ packages
Sorry,
There shouldn't any spaces in the URL.
--
Greg Madden
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dear Greg Madden:
Thanks for your response. But the link
'http://www.debian.org/distrib/ packages' does not exist. I'll try to
go down to this link another way.
Kind regards,
Angelo
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTE
Dear Greg Madden:
Thanks for your response. But the link
'http://www.debian.org/distrib/ packages' does not exist. I'll try to
go down to this link another way.
Kind regards,
Angelo
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTE
On Monday 11 July 2005 05:04 am, Angelo R. Rossi wrote:
> Hello:
>
> I want to run debian unstable on a dual-processor xeon system. Can
> someone please point me to information on the appropriate smp kernel
> as well as other information I should know, if I use debian unstable
> for this?
>
> Than
On (09/05/05 23:28), michael wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-05-09 at 23:20 +0100, Clive Menzies wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > I have a couple of servers (identical spec) with the advertised cpu as:
> > 3.2GHz 3.2GHz Intel P4 Prescott
> >
> > If I boot from Knoppix I get:
> > # uname -a
> >
> > Linux Knoppix 2.6
On Mon, 2005-05-09 at 23:20 +0100, Clive Menzies wrote:
> Hi
>
> I have a couple of servers (identical spec) with the advertised cpu as:
> 3.2GHz 3.2GHz Intel P4 Prescott
>
> If I boot from Knoppix I get:
> # uname -a
>
> Linux Knoppix 2.6.7 #2 SMP Wed Jul 28 04:25:36 CEST 2004 i686 GNU/Linux
>
ng of atmospheric physics/chemistry models). Cheers!
Michael
- Original Message -
From: "Jens Bech Madsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "linux" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 6:01 PM
Subject: Re: smp: am i see
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 17:14:28 -, linux
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A quick question about hardware. I'm 99% sure my box has 2 Xeon processors in
> it. I had installed the sarge kernel then got the
> kernel-image-2.4.27-1-686-smp_2.4.27-1.backports.org.1_i386.deb
> package and installed smoo
Stuart Murray wrote:
>Ok, So I booted from an image which the author
>reckoned had SMP compiled in. How do I actually know
>if both processors are being used?
>
beside cat /proc/cpuinfo you can use top, then press 1
button to see how much resource used by each
processor.
>Yeah I know, its dead
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Stuart Murray wrote:
| Ok, So I booted from an image which the author
| reckoned had SMP compiled in. How do I actually know
| if both processors are being used?
Hi Stuart!
You can have a look into /proc/cpuinfo - there you might find if there
are two
On Sat, 2004-10-23 at 21:00 +0100, Stuart Murray wrote:
> Ok, So I booted from an image which the author
> reckoned had SMP compiled in. How do I actually know
> if both processors are being used?
>
cat /proc/cpuinfo
--
Eric Gaumer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a di
On Thu, 12 Aug 2004, Clement wrote:
> botio wrote:
> >Clement wrote:
> >>I can boot up with kernel-image-2.6.7-1-686 but not
> >>kernel-image-2.6.7-1-686-smp. The booting just half soon after
> >>starting. Can you give me some suggestions?
> >>
> >>The hardware is, Intel m/b w 875r chip set and P4
botio wrote:
Clement wrote:
I can boot up with kernel-image-2.6.7-1-686 but not
kernel-image-2.6.7-1-686-smp. The booting just half soon after
starting. Can you give me some suggestions?
The hardware is, Intel m/b w 875r chip set and P4-2.8GHz processor.
I have this problem too on a intel
Clement wrote:
> I can boot up with kernel-image-2.6.7-1-686 but not
> kernel-image-2.6.7-1-686-smp. The booting just half soon after
> starting. Can you give me some suggestions?
>
> The hardware is, Intel m/b w 875r chip set and P4-2.8GHz processor.
>
I have this problem too on a intel d865p
On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 22:43:31 +0200
Patrick Donker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If I install deb with a dual proc kernel, while only having one cpu on
>
> the board, can I slam in a second one after the installation is done,
> and at the same time have the 2nd proc working as it would have been
Steven Jones wrote:
If you have a smp kernel it will automatically detect the extra kernel after reboot,
this is not NT land...
;]
regards
Thing
Nice :]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If you have a smp kernel it will automatically detect the extra kernel after reboot,
this is not NT land...
;]
regards
Thing
-Original Message-
From: Patrick Donker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, 10 August 2004 8:44 a.m.
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: smp install
If I insta
On (01/04/04 19:29), Pete Clarke wrote:
> > I am going to try a clean install of debian on a spare 850 to see if it
> > works, I'll ost my results when I find out.
>
> DOH! How stupid do I feel? I re-ran the SCU and set the OS to Unix/Linux and
> the 2nd CPU magically reappeared.. seems I must hav
> I've got a few of their "cousins" - the professional workstation 5000.
> The 2nd CPU isn't correctly shut down when you do a soft reboot so you
> have to do a hard reboot i.e power cycle to get CPU2 online.
I have a 5000Pro also - excellent X terminals.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROT
> I am going to try a clean install of debian on a spare 850 to see if it
> works, I'll ost my results when I find out.
DOH! How stupid do I feel? I re-ran the SCU and set the OS to Unix/Linux and
the 2nd CPU magically reappeared.. seems I must have changed it at some
point...
Sorry to waste your
Hi,
On Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 12:50:57AM +0100, Pete Clarke wrote:
> > I'm running an HP Netserver LHPro200 and it is running the same kernel
> > and both processors seem to be working fine. I think there was a
> > security patch for this kernel a few weeks ago and I didn't notice any
> > problems
> I'm running an HP Netserver LHPro200 and it is running the same kernel
> and both processors seem to be working fine. I think there was a
> security patch for this kernel a few weeks ago and I didn't notice any
> problems post upgrade.
Wierd ... everything was fine before the last kernel securi
On (01/04/04 00:21), Pete Clarke wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I have several Proliant 850r's running dual 200mhz Pentium Pro CPU's.
> I have noticed that since the last apt-get dist-upgrade the boot procedure
> no longer recognises the 2nd CPU.
>
> Each machine goes through the POST OK, with the bios i
[please wrap your lines at something sensible, it makes your mail much
easier to read]
On Sun, Nov 24, 2002 at 02:50:27PM -0500, David Ellis wrote:
> This make of machine uses the old C-BUS II architecture. Unfortunately
> the SMP Support doesn't appear to exist for this method of SMP (it's
> not
Am Freitag, 7. Juni 2002 16:50 schrieb Robert Webb:
> check for this . I looked in the /proc directory and did a cat of cpu
> but it only showed one processor at 500MHZ.
>
> Am I looking in the wrong place???
No, this is right. A cat /proc/cpuinfo should list "processor 0" and
"processor 1"
Seem
Em Sex, 2002-06-07 às 15:36, Robert Webb escreveu:
>
>
> Brooks R. Robinson wrote:
>
> >| check for this . I looked in the /proc directory and did a cat of cpu
> >| but it only showed one processor at 500MHZ.
> >|
> >| Am I looking in the wrong place???
> >
> >Greetings,
> > A cat of /proc/c
Robert Webb writes:
> I just loaded up Woody on a new machine that has two 500MHZ Pentium
> III processors. I am trying to determine if the build I loaded is
> recognizing both processors.
'cat /proc/cpuinfo' on this machine gives:
processor : 0
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
cpu family
Brooks R. Robinson wrote:
| check for this . I looked in the /proc directory and did a cat of cpu
| but it only showed one processor at 500MHZ.
|
| Am I looking in the wrong place???
Greetings,
A cat of /proc/cpuinfo should give a listing for each cpu. I get two
for
the two on my bo
When you reboot this machine, do you see 1 or 2 penguins on the screen (if
you see any at all)
You can also do something like this,
run top in one window (console) and then
dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/null
If you see ~50% cpu idle, you have more than 1 cpu working... This little
dd trick will use
I believe the packaged kernels do not support SMP. When I cat
/proc/cpuinfo, I see both my CPU's. Unless there are other packages
available, you will need to build your own kernel.
Brian
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PR
| check for this . I looked in the /proc directory and did a cat of cpu
| but it only showed one processor at 500MHZ.
|
| Am I looking in the wrong place???
Greetings,
A cat of /proc/cpuinfo should give a listing for each cpu. I get two
for
the two on my box.
HTH,
Brooks
--
To UNSUB
On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 10:50:33AM -0400, Robert Webb wrote:
> I just loaded up Woody on a new machine that has two 500MHZ Pentium III
> processors. I am trying to determine if the build I loaded is
> recognizing both processors. My problem is I have no clue as to where to
> check for this . I
On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 10:50:33AM -0400, Robert Webb wrote:
> I just loaded up Woody on a new machine that has two 500MHZ Pentium III
> processors. I am trying to determine if the build I loaded is
> recognizing both processors. My problem is I have no clue as to where to
> check for this . I
On Fri, 2002-06-07 at 10:50, Robert Webb wrote:
> I just loaded up Woody on a new machine that has two 500MHZ Pentium III
> processors. I am trying to determine if the build I loaded is
> recognizing both processors. My problem is I have no clue as to where to
> check for this . I looked in the
On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 10:50:33AM -0400, Robert Webb wrote:
| I just loaded up Woody on a new machine that has two 500MHZ Pentium III
| processors. I am trying to determine if the build I loaded is
| recognizing both processors. My problem is I have no clue as to where to
| check for this . I
On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Robert Webb wrote:
> I just loaded up Woody on a new machine that has two 500MHZ Pentium III
> processors. I am trying to determine if the build I loaded is
> recognizing both processors. My problem is I have no clue as to where to
> check for this . I looked in the /proc dire
On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 10:50:33AM -0400, Robert Webb wrote:
> I just loaded up Woody on a new machine that has two 500MHZ Pentium III
> processors. I am trying to determine if the build I loaded is
> recognizing both processors. My problem is I have no clue as to where to
> check for this . I
Hi!
On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 10:50:33AM -0400, Robert Webb wrote:
> check for this . I looked in the /proc directory and did a cat of cpu
> but it only showed one processor at 500MHZ.
Did you install a SMP kernel image (like kernel-image-2.4.9-686-smp)
or did you compile your own kernel with SMP
"Robert Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I just loaded up Woody on a new machine that has two 500MHZ Pentium
> III processors. I am trying to determine if the build I loaded is
> recognizing both processors. My problem is I have no clue as to where
> to check for this . I looked in the /proc di
Hi,
* Greg Madden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020205 12:33]:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Monday 04 February 2002 03:36 pm, Nick Hastings wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >not sure what's available in potato but a quick check on a sid box
> > reveals:
> >
> > % apt-cache search ke
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Monday 04 February 2002 03:36 pm, Nick Hastings wrote:
> Hi,
>
>not sure what's available in potato but a quick check on a sid box
> reveals:
>
> % apt-cache search kernel-image | grep -i smp
> kernel-image-2.4.16-686-smp - Linux kernel image 2
On Monday 04 February 2002 18:36 pm, Nick Hastings wrote:
> So if I wanted to install an off the shelf SMP kernel I'd do
>
> % sudo apt-get install kernel-image-2.4.17-686-smp
Thanks, Nick. Just the answer I was looking for.
--
Michael MerrittO2/CO2 Conversion Specialist [w
Hi,
not sure what's available in potato but a quick check on a sid box reveals:
% apt-cache search kernel-image | grep -i smp
kernel-image-2.4.16-686-smp - Linux kernel image 2.4.16 on
PPro/Celeron/PII/PIII SMP.
kernel-image-2.4.17-686-smp - Linux kernel image 2.4.17 on
PPro/Celeron/PII
On Tue, 2001-10-02 at 16:19, Alexander Wallace wrote:
> Hello there, excuse my ignorance here... How's the SMP implementation in
> current kernel in potato? Is it pretty efficient? Stable? Reliable?
>
> I have an IBM PC 325 with 1 P II 266 and I just saw a P II 266 for 20
> bucks in an auction...
This came back with CONFIG_SMP=y
So it looks like SMP *is* compiled in by default! I had looked at
/proc/cpuinfo, and there was mention of 2 CPUs, but I just wanted a little more
clarification.
Thanks chaps!
Andy
Kurt Lieber ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I'm sure someone will correct me if th
Andy Mott wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I have a dual-cpu box, which I just installed Potato on with ReiserFS. Is
> support for SMP built-in, or will I have to compile a new kernel (with rfs
> patches, I guess), and install that?
---
You will need
you could also
cat /proc/cpuinfo
and will show if the sys is using the (second) cpu
and some details about it
adam
On Friday 13 July 2001 4:29 pm, Kurt Lieber wrote:
> I'm sure someone will correct me if this is wrong, but:
>
> cat /boot/config-2.2.19 |grep SMP
>
> should tell you if your bo
I'm sure someone will correct me if this is wrong, but:
cat /boot/config-2.2.19 |grep SMP
should tell you if your box has SMP or not. (Mine is commented out and
says "#CONFIG_SMP is not set")
Obviously, change "config-2.2.19" if you're using a different version of
the kernel, but that file hold
These are the same symptoms that I am having. It has been driving me
crazy! I am running Debian 2.2r3 with Ximian installed.
I am running ASUS P2B-DS with dual Pentium III 500 and 512 Meg RAM.
I find the following:
* Performance actually improves with hard use. (That is, if I am
running a lo
LL> I've got a SMP machine (dual P2-266) and happily installed Debian over
LL> it ('testing' release, but with 'stable' I had the same problem): it
LL> hangs very often when using X windows.
LL> It 'hangs' the hard way: stopped mouse, keyboard not responding.
LL> It's a known issue or it's just m
On Monday 21 May 2001 01:37 am, Lapo Luchini wrote:
> I've got a SMP machine (dual P2-266) and happily installed Debian over
> it ('testing' release, but with 'stable' I had the same problem): it
> hangs very often when using X windows.
> It 'hangs' the hard way: stopped mouse, keyboard not respond
"Installing Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 For (sic) Intel x86...etc"
Ch8 sec 8.5.
I did it. Use menuconfig.
I must have screwed up somewhere though, because my tulip driver for
FA3/TX doesn't load.
--
daveA (debian.user)
5:20PM +0100 or thereabouts, Henk Janssen wrote:
> Which feature should be added in/switched on to enable SMP?
> Where can i find it?
> Thanx
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Jason Mogavero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 'Henk Janssen' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Which feature should be added in/switched on to enable SMP?
Where can i find it?
Thanx
- Original Message -
From: Jason Mogavero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 'Henk Janssen' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 6:17 PM
Subject: RE: SMP under Debian
>
Title: RE: SMP under Debian
As far as I can tell, there is no specifically designed SMP kernel-image-* packages. What you're going to have to do is get the kernel source (apt-cache search kernel-source) of your choice and rebuild the kernel yourself and include SMP support. It might
On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 11:50:05PM +0100, scr wrote:
> SMP route? To do something fast and cheap? You are clearly
> not looking at other architectures than x86?
>
> Well, a dual PowerPC (G4 Mac, do those units run well under
> Debian?) is *way* cheaper than a dual ev67 Alpha machine ...
Perhaps I'
"Karl E. Jørgensen" schrieb:
>
> I'm considering building my own box - and with lower-spec processors being
> a *lot* cheaper, I figure that I can get better value for money by going
> the SMP route.
>
> So where do I find out what motherboards/chipsets/CPUs support SMP? Any
> pointers in the r
gt; To: Paul McHale
> Cc: Debian-User
> Subject: Re: SMP and potato
>
>
> > I seem to remember linux not having very robust SMP support. I
> had heard it
> > was improving. Does anyone know what the state of it is? Is
> potato's SMP
> > better than sl
On Fri, 15 Sep 2000, Leonardo Dias wrote:
> > was improving. Does anyone know what the state of it is? Is potato's SMP
> > better than slink? I would think it is a function of the kernel, not the
> > distro, but I could be wrong.
>
> You are wrong. SMP is totally written in the kernel. But you
> I seem to remember linux not having very robust SMP support. I had heard it
> was improving. Does anyone know what the state of it is? Is potato's SMP
> better than slink? I would think it is a function of the kernel, not the
> distro, but I could be wrong.
You are wrong. SMP is totally wri
On Sun, Mar 26, 2000 at 04:26:35PM +0200, Vitux wrote:
> Is there a SMP-howto?
See: /usr/src/linux/Documentation/smp.tex
(although it is pretty deep stuff, at least my my standards)
(if you don't have tex stuff installed, just browse the file)
> Any tips, recommendations for running Debian on a d
Vitux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Hi there
> Just got a dual-processor mobo for cheap.
> Is there a SMP-howto?
> Any tips, recommendations for running Debian on a dual
> PII-350, 256ram?
> (yes, I'm new at this ;-)
> Regards
> Vitux
>
/usr/share/doc/HOWTO/en-txt/SMP-HOWTO.txt.gz in the doc-
On Sun, Mar 26, 2000 at 04:26:35PM +0200, Vitux wrote:
> Hi there
> Just got a dual-processor mobo for cheap.
> Is there a SMP-howto?
> Any tips, recommendations for running Debian on a dual
> PII-350, 256ram?
> (yes, I'm new at this ;-)
> Regards
> Vitux
Basically you need to recompile your kerne
On Mon, 21 Feb 2000, Oki DZ wrote:
>
> On Fri, 18 Feb 2000, Sean Johnson wrote:
>
> > Phil Brutsche wrote:
> >
> > > it's one of two ways Linux can use Intel-based SMP systems (the other is
> > > IO-APIC used on PIIs on up, and maybe PPros).
> >
> > Seems to be on the PPros too
> >
> > In
Peter Bartosch wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> > On Sat, 19 Feb 2000, Phil Brutsche wrote:
> >
> > pbruts >Yes, I've heard (she posted here once). All the documentation I've
> > seen
> > pbruts >for dual P5 boards, and all those that I've talked to, say that
> > such a
> > pbruts >machine can't exist.
> >
On Fri, 18 Feb 2000, Phil Brutsche wrote:
> Trying it is the best way of finding out. Just keep in mind that pretty
> much any 486 is slow, and adding a second processor will mean that it's
> still slower than a Pentium.
Yes sure, but the problem is that the other machine is currently being
use
On Fri, 18 Feb 2000, Sean Johnson wrote:
> Phil Brutsche wrote:
>
> > it's one of two ways Linux can use Intel-based SMP systems (the other is
> > IO-APIC used on PIIs on up, and maybe PPros).
>
> Seems to be on the PPros too
>
> Intel MultiProcessor Specification v1.1
> Virtual Wire
Hi!
> On Sat, 19 Feb 2000, Phil Brutsche wrote:
>
> pbruts >Yes, I've heard (she posted here once). All the documentation I've
> seen
> pbruts >for dual P5 boards, and all those that I've talked to, say that such a
> pbruts >machine can't exist.
> pbruts >
> pbruts >I'd like to hear how it was
On Sat, 19 Feb 2000, Phil Brutsche wrote:
pbruts >Yes, I've heard (she posted here once). All the documentation I've seen
pbruts >for dual P5 boards, and all those that I've talked to, say that such a
pbruts >machine can't exist.
pbruts >
pbruts >I'd like to hear how it was done - maybe it'll wor
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far way, someone said...
> somebody on the "debian-user-de"-list said that she uses 2 K6 on a dual P5
> board
Yes, I've heard (she posted here once). All the documentation I've seen
for dual P5 boards, and all those that I've talked to, say that such a
machine c
Hi!
>
> [1] Actually, some AMD processors do support SMP - the K6 (I think it was
> the K6) and the Athlon (most definitely - it uses the bus protocol of
> Compaq's Alpha, called EV6). However, there are no such systems that I've
> ever heard of; no one makes a motherboard that supports dual AM
On Fri, 18 Feb 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Feb 2000, Sean Johnson wrote:
>
> > Phil Brutsche wrote:
> >
> > > it's one of two ways Linux can use Intel-based SMP systems (the other is
> > > IO-APIC used on PIIs on up, and maybe PPros).
> >
> > Seems to be on the PPros too
> >
Hi,
On Thu, 17 Feb 2000, Phil Brutsche wrote:
> A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far way, someone said...
>
> > On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, aphro wrote:
> >
> > > you sure that MB supports dual processors? it seems as if linux doesn't
> > > say its a SMP capable MB at all.
> >
> > Well, the machine
On Fri, 18 Feb 2000, Sean Johnson wrote:
> Phil Brutsche wrote:
>
> > it's one of two ways Linux can use Intel-based SMP systems (the other is
> > IO-APIC used on PIIs on up, and maybe PPros).
>
> Seems to be on the PPros too
>
> Intel MultiProcessor Specification v1.1
> Virtual Wire
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far way, someone said...
> Phil Brutsche wrote:
>
> > it's one of two ways Linux can use Intel-based SMP systems (the other is
> > IO-APIC used on PIIs on up, and maybe PPros).
>
> Seems to be on the PPros too
>
> Intel MultiProcessor Specification v1.1
>
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far way, someone said...
> On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, Phil Brutsche wrote:
> > It's conceivable that the BIOS would enable it's SMP support when the
> > second CPU card in added. It's also possible that there was BIOS on the
> > CPU card that 'patched' (somehow) the mo
On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, Phil Brutsche wrote:
> It's concievable that the BIOS would enable it's SMP support when the
> second CPU card in added. It's also possible that there was BIOS on the
> CPU card that 'patched' (somehow) the motherboard's BIOS.
I see, so it's worth trying.
I think the best w
Phil Brutsche wrote:
> it's one of two ways Linux can use Intel-based SMP systems (the other is
> IO-APIC used on PIIs on up, and maybe PPros).
Seems to be on the PPros too
Intel MultiProcessor Specification v1.1
Virtual Wire compatibility mode.
OEM ID: OEM0 Product ID: PROD
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far way, someone said...
> On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, aphro wrote:
>
> > you sure that MB supports dual processors? it seems as if linux doesn't
> > say its a SMP capable MB at all.
>
> Well, the machine (AcerAltos) has two slots for CPU daughterboards.
>
> > can li
On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, aphro wrote:
> you sure that MB supports dual processors? it seems as if linux doesn't
> say its a SMP capable MB at all.
Well, the machine (AcerAltos) has two slots for CPU daughterboards.
> can linux run on SMP 486s ? never heard of anyone who ever ran a dual cpu
> 486,
1 - 100 of 131 matches
Mail list logo
