From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 26 13:02:25 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90A0C37B404 for ; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 13:02:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from postal3.es.net (postal3.es.net [198.128.3.207]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA9C643F75 for ; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 13:02:24 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from oberman@es.net) Received: from ptavv.es.net ([198.128.4.29]) by postal3.es.net (Postal Node 3) with ESMTP id MUA74016 for ; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 13:02:23 -0800 Received: from ptavv (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ptavv.es.net (Tachyon Server) with ESMTP id 9B74B5D07 for ; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 13:02:23 -0800 (PST) To: current@freebsd.org Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 13:02:23 -0800 From: "Kevin Oberman" Message-Id: <20030326210223.9B74B5D07@ptavv.es.net> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none version=2.50 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) Subject: AC97 sound problems with current X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 21:02:26 -0000 After upgrading my laptop from STABLE to CURRENT on 3/14 I have been having problems with GnomeMeeting. Often the sound is badly broken with 'spurts' of sound with silent gaps in between. This was never the case with STABLE. Other times it's fine. When I looked at my dmesg output I noticed some changes between STABLE and CURRENT for the pcm0 device. Under STABLE I only got two messages: pcm0: port 0x18c0-0x18ff,0x1c00-0x1cff irq 11 at device 31.5 on pci0 pcm0: Under CURRENT I get a third: pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 512000000 Hz But the link rate jumps all over the place: pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 227555555 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 227555555 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 227555555 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 204800000 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 5595 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 512000000 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 227555555 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 227555555 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 227555555 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 1024000000 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 227555555 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 227555555 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 227555555 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 204800000 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 204800000 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 227555555 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 227555555 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 227555555 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 204800000 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 204800000 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 5976 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 95997 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 96051 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 227555555 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 204800000 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 1534082 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 227555555 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 227555555 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 227555555 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 1541008 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 1527218 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 1536384 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 1526080 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 227555555 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 227555555 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 227555555 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 95997 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 96028 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 95961 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 96033 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 95961 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 90331 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 227555555 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 204800000 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 204800000 Hz pcm0: measured ac97 link rate at 256000000 Hz While I don't know anything about DSPs in general or the AC97, this looks most odd. The ones around 96 KHz look reasonable, I guess, but I have a hard time believing >200 MHz or <6 KHz. Has anyone else with an ICH3 chip set seen this? Any idea what might be going on here? R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: oberman@es.net Phone: +1 510 486-8634