From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Jan 23 23:22:37 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from lists.blarg.net (lists.blarg.net [206.124.128.17]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7207A37B400 for ; Wed, 23 Jan 2002 23:22:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from thig.blarg.net (thig.blarg.net [206.124.128.18]) by lists.blarg.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11271BCE2; Wed, 23 Jan 2002 23:22:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([206.124.139.115]) by thig.blarg.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA03952; Wed, 23 Jan 2002 23:22:34 -0800 Received: (from jojo@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.3) id g0O7PMI01652; Wed, 23 Jan 2002 23:25:22 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from swear@blarg.net) To: Jud Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Cooling Athlon / Linux App References: From: swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen) Date: 23 Jan 2002 23:25:21 -0800 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Lines: 21 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.1 (Cuyahoga Valley) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Jud writes: > I think if you read the VCool documentation, you'll find that the theory, > at least, is that the Athlon is unable to reach idle mode unless its > system bus is disconnected, even when it would otherwise make > eminent sense for the CPU to do so because the system isn't busy. > VCool purports to set the "Bus Disconnect Enable" bit and so allow the > CPU to go into idle mode at appropriate times. That quoted phrase doesn't appear in google *freebsd* archive except in this thread. If you think that's important and different from the CPU_SUSP_HLT mentioned in another msg, please ask about that on -stable or -current or -hackers or -hardware (?); maybe they've missed something. I doubt it, but you seem to have physical evidence of it. (For the thermal paste, get a piece of hard plastic with a smooth straight edge just a bit wider than the chip and spread it real even but real thin. I've put it only on the chip the few times I've done it, but I'm thinking that it would be better to spread it only on the heat sink both because it is probably rougher and easier to clean the over-spread. I'm guessing that putting it on both surfaces is more apt to leave bubbles.) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message