Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 98554
'noht' option doesn't work on E7501 boxen
Last modified: 2007-04-18 12:55:28 EDT
Description of problem:
We have recently acquired two SuperMicro E7501 boards (X5DPE-G2) which we have
been validating with RH8 and the kit my company produces. It all works fine
apart from the fact that when the BIOS allows HT, the boxen always come up with
four processors - whether noht is specified on the bootline or not.
The noht line _does_ change _something though. I brought a node up with and
without noht and compared the contents of /proc/cpuinfo. They were
substantially the same except I found that:
siblings : 2
flags : ..... ht ..
siblings : 1
flags : ....... <- There is no "ht"
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Get a system with X5DPE-G2 mobo (possibly any with E7501 chipset)
2. Install RedHat 220.127.116.11-7
3. Boot it with the noht option.
The node still has 2 logical processors per processor
The node should only have 1 logical processor per processor.
what's the kernel version ?
Sorry for the slow reply......
Kernel version is 2.4.18-14 (RH), but it also applies to various other 2.4.18-
based kernels (we use varieties of our own, though most of them are based on
the current RH kernel).
the current RHL kernel is 2.4.20 based
in addition noht only works if the bios follows intels guidelines strictly.
Hmm, your current standard release kernel is 2.4.20, but the advanced server
products are still 2.4.9-based, yes? I will test with that and 2.4.20 to see if
they can handle it correctly.
SuperMicro assure me that their BIOS complies with Intel guidelines. I'll see
if there is a BIOS upgrade, though, as the product is relatively new.
Just tried 2.4.20 and 2.4.9-e3 with no joy. I'm currently chasing up SuperMicro
on BIOS-ly issues.
I have a new BIOS that I intend to check out today. More later.
Thanks for the bug report. However, Red Hat no longer maintains this version of
the product. Please upgrade to the latest version and open a new bug if the problem
The Fedora Legacy project (http://fedoralegacy.org/) maintains some older releases,
and if you believe this bug is interesting to them, please report the problem in
the bug tracker at: http://bugzilla.fedora.us/