From owner-freebsd-current Thu Oct 15 16:56:21 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA29499 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:56:21 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from smtp02.primenet.com (smtp02.primenet.com [206.165.6.132]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA29494 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:56:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert@usr04.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp02.primenet.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA23117; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:56:01 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr04.primenet.com(206.165.6.204) via SMTP by smtp02.primenet.com, id smtpd022983; Thu Oct 15 16:55:50 1998 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr04.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA28005; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 16:55:47 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199810152355.QAA28005@usr04.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Limits Problems ... To: jbryant@unix.tfs.net Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 23:55:47 +0000 (GMT) Cc: darin@slovitt.net, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199810151853.NAA16334@unix.tfs.net> from "Jim Bryant" at Oct 15, 98 01:52:59 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I've had this ever since the beginning of summer or thereabouts when i > put -current on this toshiba 660cdt laptop. when i reported this, all > i got were a lot of "that's what you get when you run -current" > messages, and a couple of potentially useful messages stating that it > might be caused by the apm counters. ----> IT'S NOT APM. This happens on a box I have that wouldn't know an APM if it ran up and bit it on the ass. The box was designed prior to APM existing. ----> IT'S NOT A BUGGY 486 L2 CACHE. This box doesn't *have* an L2 cache. ----> IT'S NOT A BUGGY 486 L1 CACHE. This box's 486 stepping postdates the 486 L1 cache problems, but to be on the safe side, I wrote the configuration register and *turned the L1 cache off*. THE PROBLEM DOES NOT EXIST IN 2.2.5. > i have heard nothing more about this, the problem has never been > fixed, and is now going into -RELEASE. > > and to the jerks who gave the "that's what you get when you run > -current" answers originally, -current is also for reporting problems > such as these so they don't get into -release... > > i know people have a lot to discuss, such as x and y chromosomes, and > very little time for stuff like this. The "monoclock" is going backwards. There are quotes here, since real monoclocks, by definition, *can't* go backwards (the "mono" stands for "monotonically increasing", and going backwards involves *decreasing*). I don't care if APM kicks in, and the laptop is in suspend mode for 10 frigging *years*, the value from the monoclock at the time the process is started can *NEVER* *NEVER* *EVER* exceed the current monoclock time. This is a DEFINITION. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message