Package Details: linux-ck-headers 4.8.4-4

Git Clone URL: (read-only)
Package Base: linux-ck
Description: Header files and scripts to build modules for linux-ck.
Upstream URL:
Licenses: GPL2
Conflicts: linux-ck-atom-headers, linux-ck-barcelona-headers, linux-ck-broadwell-headers, linux-ck-bulldozer-headers, linux-ck-core2-headers, linux-ck-corex-headers, linux-ck-haswell-headers, linux-ck-ivybridge-headers, linux-ck-k10-headers, linux-ck-kx-headers, linux-ck-nehalem-headers, linux-ck-p4-headers, linux-ck-pentm-headers, linux-ck-piledriver-headers, linux-ck-sandybridge-headers, linux-ck-silvermont-headers, linux-ck-skylake-headers
Provides: linux-ck-headers=4.8.4, linux-headers=4.8.4
Submitter: graysky
Maintainer: graysky
Last Packager: graysky
Votes: 340
Popularity: 12.709196
First Submitted: 2011-07-22 14:51
Last Updated: 2016-10-24 19:18

Dependencies (5)

Required by (239)

Sources (10)

Latest Comments

artafinde commented on 2016-10-27 07:04

I was one of the persons who had issues with NUMA on an AMD FX 8100. About 6 months ago I changed to i7 6700 and disabled NUMA. No issues so far. I did had btrfs corruption with linux-ck early MuQSS versions (v110 I think) so I was a late adopter but now running pretty stable for days. I think the NUMA issue were related to AM3+ socket.

mlc commented on 2016-10-27 04:28

I'm running linux-ck with NUMA disabled since about two weeks. I haven't yet experienced any problems with my Skylake CPU.

graysky commented on 2016-10-26 21:16

@QD - It's a small increase using a make endpoint in my experience (see the flyspray I note in the PKGBUILD comments). It could be that other endpoints revel more substantial gains as well. In any case, NUMA is really for servers with multiple sockets; it has no point on a single socket motherboard is my understanding. Linux-ck had it disabled for a long time until some combination of upstream/BFS + NUMA disabled was believed to be responsible for problems which is when I disabled the code to disable it. Now that MuQSS has replaced BFS, this may not be the case any more. Several users have posted to the AUR reporting stability with it disabled as is my experience as well.

QuartzDragon commented on 2016-10-26 20:50

How much of a speed increase does disabling NUMA actually give, anyway? I've never really felt the difference.

graysky commented on 2016-10-26 19:17

Greg just tagged 4.8.5-rc1 and has it scheduled to release on Friday/noon UTC[1]. We can give disabling NUMA a whirl in 4.8.5-1 if there are no reports linking this setting to bad behavior with MuQSS (I am not experiencing anything bad on my Haswell).


metaphorex0 commented on 2016-10-26 10:45

I've been running linux-ck with NUMA disabled since you added that option back to PKGBUILD. I've had 0 issues so far.

graysky commented on 2016-10-25 15:49

I can but I would like to get some additional feedback from others who build with NUMA disabled since it caused problems in the past. I too have it disabled on my workstation without ill effects. Can other AUR users please comment. If you have NUMA disabled, are you running a stable 4.8.4-4?

mareex commented on 2016-10-25 15:45

hi graysky, would you mind to disable NUMA in your repo builds? Never had any problems on four machines with NUMA disabled.

graysky commented on 2016-10-25 10:28

@mono - Please report upstream:

monotykamary commented on 2016-10-25 06:42

No more complete freezes, but it now slows to a crawl on the same application.

All comments