Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 92

Thread: Gigabyte's ASPM Motherboard Fix: Use Windows

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,824

    Default Gigabyte's ASPM Motherboard Fix: Use Windows

    Phoronix: Gigabyte's ASPM Motherboard Fix: Use Windows

    If you have an affected motherboard to the ASPM power regression in the Linux kernel and it's from Gigabyte, don't expect a BIOS update from them to correct the ASPM semantics in the BIOS. Gigabyte recommends you just use Microsoft Windows...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTAwMjg

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    i do have a gigabyte mainboard right now but to read this about gigabyte makes me sad--

    maybe i really buy supermicro or tyan next time.

    i do have a Tyan mainboard in the past but the nvidia nfoce 3600 pro makes many trouble with the graphic driver and the bios do have tons of bugs like the 128gb first boot pardition bug if you have a pardition greater than 128gb it fails to start grub. also the bios do have a bug that force me to use ext3 or raiserfs it does not start with ext4...

    but maybe the modern mainboards with amd chipset are much better than that.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,791

    Default

    These are Microsoft technologies anyway. No wonder they don't work.

    But please feel free to wake me up next time a Linux vendor innovates a new Desktop hardware technology itself. I'm pretty sure Red Hat and Canonical have done much in this regard.

    /sarcasm off

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RealNC View Post
    These are Microsoft technologies anyway. No wonder they don't work.

    But please feel free to wake me up next time a Linux vendor innovates a new Desktop hardware technology itself. I'm pretty sure Red Hat and Canonical have done much in this regard.

    /sarcasm off
    What scares the hell out of me is how many motherboard manufacturers are going to use Windows 8 digital signing and not give an option to disable it in their bios rendering trying to install any other OS useless. I can actually see venders doing this in the near future as a way of avoiding the "hassling linux bug issues".

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,791

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    What scares the hell out of me is how many motherboard manufacturers are going to use Windows 8 digital signing and not give an option to disable it in their bios rendering trying to install any other OS useless. I can actually see venders doing this in the near future as a way of avoiding the "hassling linux bug issues".
    Is there a reason why Linux can't provide signatures that allow installation?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Columbus, OH, USA
    Posts
    323

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RealNC View Post
    Is there a reason why Linux can't provide signatures that allow installation?
    I think I heard the UEFI signing is done by MS, but please don't quote me on that.... More importantly, though, considering the nature of OSS, having any authority sign every possible build of our four (that I know of) bootloaders by n possible versions of 7+ compilers is...unlikely.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RealNC View Post
    Is there a reason why Linux can't provide signatures that allow installation?
    Ya there is a couple of issues. First of all using a signed key could be seen as a form of DRM which has it's issuses with gpl code. Secondly the code verification would have to be done in a open manner which kind of defeats the purpose of signature protection.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qaridarium View Post
    i do have a gigabyte mainboard right now but to read this about gigabyte makes me sad--

    maybe i really buy supermicro or tyan next time.

    i do have a Tyan mainboard in the past but the nvidia nfoce 3600 pro makes many trouble with the graphic driver and the bios do have tons of bugs like the 128gb first boot pardition bug if you have a pardition greater than 128gb it fails to start grub. also the bios do have a bug that force me to use ext3 or raiserfs it does not start with ext4...

    but maybe the modern mainboards with amd chipset are much better than that.
    I've got several servers running Tyan mainboard. Due to my loath for nvidia products, they are ALL AMD chipsets. I've never had a problem with one of those boards, brutally stable. I've got a couple with uptimes pushing a decade.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    442

    Default

    I have a Biostar (GeForce 6100 am2 (v1.x)) motherboard. I don't know whether it supports ASPM or not, but I wouldn't hope for them to release a BIOS that did. It works alright, but it has it's quirks (suspend isn't quite what you'd expect, and it displays a warning at every POST if you upclock anywhere beyond the base 200Mhz...whatever that means; actual processor speed doesn't seem to change).

    They haven't updated the BIOS for this board since December 2007, and it was a beta version. Of course, the 3.x revision of the motherboard has a more recent (not beta) BIOS, but I dare not try to use it on my board....

    Lessons learned: do (actual) research before you buy, and don't buy cheep. >_<

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    193

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nobu View Post
    I have a Biostar (GeForce 6100 am2 (v1.x)) motherboard. I don't know whether it supports ASPM or not, but I wouldn't hope for them to release a BIOS that did. It works alright, but it has it's quirks (suspend isn't quite what you'd expect, and it displays a warning at every POST if you upclock anywhere beyond the base 200Mhz...whatever that means; actual processor speed doesn't seem to change).

    They haven't updated the BIOS for this board since December 2007, and it was a beta version. Of course, the 3.x revision of the motherboard has a more recent (not beta) BIOS, but I dare not try to use it on my board....

    Lessons learned: do (actual) research before you buy, and don't buy cheep. >_<
    On a 2.6.38 or newer kernel "dmesg | grep ASPM"

    And it's not a huge issue if it's a desktop, though it is a bigger issue on laptops or in data centers.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •