On 30 Dec 2014, at 16:34, Steven Hartland <killing at multiplay.co.uk> wrote:> > This is strengthened by the fact that ATI's previous generation HW (SB600) had MSI disabled by r245875 due to a very similar issue. > > So given all the evidence so far ahci.0.msi=1 may well be the fix. >Is there any benefit to also trying with mdi > 1 < 8? Joe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 496 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/attachments/20150101/dd25307f/attachment.sig>
On 01/01/2015 17:18, Dr Josef Karthauser wrote:> On 30 Dec 2014, at 16:34, Steven Hartland <killing at multiplay.co.uk> wrote: >> This is strengthened by the fact that ATI's previous generation HW (SB600) had MSI disabled by r245875 due to a very similar issue. >> >> So given all the evidence so far ahci.0.msi=1 may well be the fix. >> > Is there any benefit to also trying with mdi > 1 < 8?Nope as the ahci(4) details there's only 3 settings: 0 = MSI disabled 1 = Single MSI vector used, if supported 2 = Multiple MSI vectors used, if supported (default) If setting it to 1 does fix it, I've got a patch which provides a quirk we can use to make that the default for this HW. Regards Steve
On 01/01/2015 17:18, Dr Josef Karthauser wrote:> On 30 Dec 2014, at 16:34, Steven Hartland <killing at multiplay.co.uk> wrote: >> This is strengthened by the fact that ATI's previous generation HW (SB600) had MSI disabled by r245875 due to a very similar issue. >> >> So given all the evidence so far ahci.0.msi=1 may well be the fix. >> > Is there any benefit to also trying with mdi > 1 < 8? > >Any joy with this Josef?