[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: How disable one of dual processors?



Thanks for the help fellows!!! 

I did the machine only start with the processor #0!!! Now I'll analyse
the perfornance of the machine.

On 6/1/05, Dean Hamstead <dean@bong.com.au> wrote:
> given that cpu0 is dead, you might get some life out of it
> in the interum before getting a replacement by simply
> physically swapping cpus
> 
> (2c)
> 
> Dean
> 
> Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > On Wed, 2005-06-01 at 16:04 -0300, Paulo Ricardo Paz Vital wrote:
> >
> >>Hello fellows,
> >>
> >>I have a dual PowerMac G4 (described below in /proc/cpuinfo) and for a
> >>few months it has presenting some problems. When I am operating the
> >>machine, is presented in gkrellm that the processor #1 stops
> >>operating. This crash presents two different scenes: (1) the processor
> >>#1 stops but the processor #0  operates normally, supporting all
> >>amount of work; and (2) the two processors stops and I need reboot the
> >>machine.
> >>
> >>I'm using the kernel version 2.6.8 and this same problem occur in
> >>other kernel versions and in Mac OS X, too.
> >>
> >>Verifying /var/log/messages, I can see this anormal message:
> >>
> >>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>/var/log/messages:
> >>May 30 11:20:23 falcao kernel: Machine check in kernel mode.
> >>May 30 11:20:23 falcao kernel: Caused by (from SRR1=20009030): L1 Data
> >>Cache error
> >>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>I did some searches using Google, but I didn't find a solution for
> >>this problem. I suppose disabling the processor #1, I can solve this
> >>problem. So, how can I disable one of my dual processors?? Or, how can
> >>I solve this problem :-D ??
> >
> >
> > Looks like one of your processors is indeed broken. Try booting with
> > maxcpus=1 on the kernel command line (and hope that's not CPU0 that is
> > dead).
> >
> > Ben.
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 


-- 
[s]

Paulo Ricardo Paz Vital



Reply to: