PDA

View Full Version : "Aperture too small (32MB)" with 2.6.24.4-64.fc8 kernel (64-bit)



rweed
4th April 2008, 09:12 AM
With latest kernel update, I'm seeing an "Aperture too small (32MB)" message on the screen as it boots up. I found these lines in /var/log/messages.


Apr 4 03:21:12 localhost kernel: Checking aperture...
Apr 4 03:21:12 localhost kernel: CPU 0: aperture @ 8000000000 size 32 MB
Apr 4 03:21:12 localhost kernel: Aperture too small (32 MB)
Apr 4 03:21:12 localhost kernel: No AGP bridge found

The on-screen message is new, but the logs have had this for a while. I don't use an AGP card (I have PCIE)...can I just ignore it?!?

tia, Rick

Hlingler
4th April 2008, 09:40 AM
With latest kernel update, I'm seeing an "Aperture too small (32MB)" message on the screen as it boots up. I found these lines in /var/log/messages.


Apr 4 03:21:12 localhost kernel: Checking aperture...
Apr 4 03:21:12 localhost kernel: CPU 0: aperture @ 8000000000 size 32 MB
Apr 4 03:21:12 localhost kernel: Aperture too small (32 MB)
Apr 4 03:21:12 localhost kernel: No AGP bridge found

The on-screen message is new, but the logs have had this for a while. I don't use an AGP card (I have PCIE)...can I just ignore it?!?

tia, RickWell, is your video hardware/software working correctly? If it is, then I'd say ignore it. To be perfectly honest, I don't know if AGP aperture is relevant or not with PCIe - nor your video setup, which you haven't specified.

V

leigh123linux
4th April 2008, 09:49 AM
I have the same error !



Checking aperture...
CPU 0: aperture @ 92a0000000 size 32 MB
Aperture too small (32 MB)
No AGP bridge found


[root@localhost ~]# uname -r
2.6.24.4-74.fc8
[root@localhost ~]#

It doesn't seem to effect my PCIe nvidia card .

rweed
5th April 2008, 04:59 AM
Well, is your video hardware/software working correctly? If it is, then I'd say ignore it. To be perfectly honest, I don't know if AGP aperture is relevant or not with PCIe - nor your video setup, which you haven't specified.

V
Just because it's working does not mean it's working at the maximum possible performance level.

Hlingler
5th April 2008, 05:12 AM
Just because it's working does not mean it's working at the maximum possible performance level.You are of course correct. Once again, I profess my ignorance here - I should not have commented since I don't have the knowledge or facts.

V

sharique
8th April 2008, 08:43 AM
I'm also getting same error on boot.
I have 64 bit shared video memory

Kasper-pA-
9th April 2008, 03:19 PM
I've got the same message and my x won't come up, keeps sending me to the diag screen for xwindows.. ugh,, 3-50 works tho no errors... :(

sharique
9th April 2008, 06:36 PM
I've got the same message and my x won't come up, keeps sending me to the diag screen for xwindows.. ugh,, 3-50 works tho no errors... :(
It happened with me as well. but in next reboot x is working.

DesrtScrpn
10th April 2008, 03:43 AM
I have the same problem on my HP DV6110US laptop. My X never gave me a problem and I was able to install my NVidia driver just fine. Usually I can find the solution to problems by surfing the forums but it seems that a lot of people are having this problem and haven't found a fix for it yet. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Brent

leigh123linux
10th April 2008, 08:37 AM
Well I have a similar in Rawhide as well !



Apr 10 08:15:32 localhost kernel: Checking aperture...
Apr 10 08:15:32 localhost kernel: Node 0: aperture @ 92b0000000 size 32 MB
Apr 10 08:15:32 localhost kernel: Aperture beyond 4GB. Ignoring.
Apr 10 08:15:32 localhost kernel: No AGP bridge found

Anniedog
10th April 2008, 08:45 AM
Just joining the club, no problems detected. Just the message. Is this an on board video chip check? I am using PCIE nvidia card so bios has been changed. Reading the message log however it shows up CPU0. So perhaps it is even a dual core thing. I have just the one on the amd below.

lovenemesis
11th April 2008, 02:28 PM
Is this a serious problem?
I saw the same message on my laptop with NVIDIA Geforce 8400M G. It shared 512M memory from my 4G RAM.
And I am enjoying Neverwinter Night (It's an old one but I didn't finish it on my old laptop 5 years ago )though thest days with highest image quality enabled. All works well, no wrong image mapping, no pop-up error, and compiz works well as well.

sharique
11th April 2008, 06:17 PM
Is this a serious problem?
I saw the same message on my laptop with NVIDIA Geforce 8400M G. It shared 512M memory from my 4G RAM.
And I am enjoying Neverwinter Night (It's an old one but I didn't finish it on my old laptop 5 years ago )though thest days with highest image quality enabled. All works well, no wrong image mapping, no pop-up error, and compiz works well as well.

I'm not sure, but till as my experience upto now. NO.
But I'm feeling performance of my machine is little slow.

lovenemesis
12th April 2008, 02:06 PM
Ha, it might just be a matter of feeling. :)

How about asking someone who used your machine before but not knows this problem? Ask them whether they feel slower than before.

sharique
16th April 2008, 07:38 AM
Ha, it might just be a matter of feeling. :)

How about asking someone who used your machine before but not knows this problem? Ask them whether they feel slower than before.
I asked my friends, they told me that my system really become slow :( after kernel upgrade.

lovenemesis
16th April 2008, 03:31 PM
Oh, it's too bad!

Have you tried bootchart?
yum install bootchart

It's a tool which can help you to analyse the time for boot processing. Pay attention to the top one which shows the time caused b kernel load.

See if there is difference.

lordamus
17th April 2008, 10:00 AM
I`ve same warning at boot I`m on fc8_x86 64 with latest kernel nvidia 8500 pciex

stumpjumper
19th April 2008, 04:18 AM
I have the same entry booting up as well. Don't know if it is causing a problem on my HP Pavillon dv2000 but would like to give it the space it needs just the same.

sharique
19th April 2008, 07:05 AM
Here is bootchart.

I have done other tests as well. I found that other tests are also showing lower performance.
(glxgears low by 100+ from 1700 to 1625).

Hlingler
19th April 2008, 07:19 AM
Here is bootchart.

I have done other tests as well. I found that other tests are also showing lower performance.
(glxgears low by 100+ from 1700 to 1625).glxgears is not a benchmark tool, and is an extremely poor way to measure graphics performance. If you want a real benchmark, install package "hardinfo" and run the FBENCH test. But it's too late to go back and test your prior performance, so you have no history to compare with....

Again, to drive the point home: glxgears is NOT a benchmark tool.

V

lovenemesis
19th April 2008, 09:37 AM
I agree with Hlingler.

I am astonished by your boot time. It's your personal web and email server, isn't it?

If it was not, how can you tolerate such a long boot time?

Here are mine. Comparing the the newest one to the previous one, there is no significant different. The newest one take 10s longer because I replaced the static "readahead" with dynamic "preload" and add lm_sensors service.