-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 12:49:18 +0100
Bastien ROUCARIES <roucaries.bastien@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 10:40 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > My concern about the SMI disable module is that it can damage Joe
> > users hardware. I have at least two reports where the CPU got fried
> > and some others where people got confused because chips started
> > behaving weird and it took quite a time to figure out that they used
> > the SMI disabler. A big fat warning about this code is definitely
> > necessary.
> >
> > Thanks,
>
>
> I suppose the non joe user could flash their motherboard with
> linuxcore and therefore do not distrub by SMI :)
>
Except for the fact that linuxcore is unaware of the specific
requirements a particular motherboard has for thermal management.
Turning off SMI's unconditionally is a *bad* idea. Better to start
telling hardware vendors that we can't use their platform because of
unexplained latencies (which we presume to be SMI's).
Clark
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.10 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkl8f5oACgkQHyuj/+TTEp0JuwCfQaaugU+MY8nWHKsvXuVNmE6X
IEYAoMFn70BK9NczzHI1XnnQwy7bx/Ja
=aRKl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
ÿôèº{.nÇ+?·?®??+%?Ëÿ±éݶ¥?wÿº{.nÇ+?·¥?{±þ»ÿºÇ«³ø§¶?¡Ü¨}©?²Æ zÚ&j:+v?¨þø ¯ù ®w¥þ?à2?Þ?¨èÚ&¢)ß¡«a¶Úÿÿûàz¿äz¹Þ?ú+?ù???Ý¢jÿ?wèþf
