From owner-freebsd-current Tue Jan 30 08:52:15 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id IAA06382 for current-outgoing; Tue, 30 Jan 1996 08:52:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu (halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.159]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA06322 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 1996 08:52:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu; (5.65/1.1.8.2/19Aug95-0530PM) id AA15588; Tue, 30 Jan 1996 11:38:27 -0500 Date: Tue, 30 Jan 1996 11:38:27 -0500 From: "Garrett A. Wollman" Message-Id: <9601301638.AA15588@halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu> To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch) Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org (FreeBSD-current users) Subject: Re: any ideas about this crash? In-Reply-To: <199601300058.BAA10336@uriah.heep.sax.de> References: <9601291730.AA05796@halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu> <199601300058.BAA10336@uriah.heep.sax.de> Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk < said: > My machine at work claims 99.95 MHz since i've upgraded it to -current > today. It displayed 100 MHz with 2.0.5. 2.0.5 automatically (:-() added a very large rounding factor to make sure that my 60-MHz machine would actually be diagnosed as 60 MHz. 2.2 does not. All the evidence I've seen points to problems with the ISA timer/counter chip (well, cell in the bridge chip) and the DELAY() function. If you have a 90-MHz CPU and the system diagnoses it at 100 MHz, then your timer/counter is running 11% too slow, or your CPU clock is running 11% too fast. -GAWollman -- Garrett A. Wollman | Shashish is simple, it's discreet, it's brief. ... wollman@lcs.mit.edu | Shashish is the bonding of hearts in spite of distance. Opinions not those of| It is a bond more powerful than absence. We like people MIT, LCS, ANA, or NSA| who like Shashish. - Claude McKenzie + Florent Vollant