From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 9 17:18:31 2004 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 3F08616A4CF for ; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 17:18:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from red.csi.cam.ac.uk (red.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.70]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9D5543D2D for ; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 17:18:30 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from br260@cam.ac.uk) Received: from br260.wolfson.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.242.109] helo=[192.168.0.2]) by red.csi.cam.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1B0sMf-0000ZR-00; Wed, 10 Mar 2004 01:18:29 +0000 In-Reply-To: <20040310002922.2242.qmail@web13121.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040310002922.2242.qmail@web13121.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v612) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: Bin Ren Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 01:18:28 +0000 To: Doom Neine X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.612) cc: Current FreeBSD Subject: Re: garbage string as cpu identifier 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, 10 Mar 2004 01:18:31 -0000 The patch is not to 'fix' your problem by replacing garbage string with a sane one, but rather to make sure on your Athlon CPU, 'cpuid' does return garbage string expectedly. This could mean a very tricky software initialization bug or even a hardware bug. After confirming fault 'cpuid', I'll try to find the very reason and fix it. -- Bin On 10 Mar 2004, at 00:29, Doom Neine wrote: > thanks a lot, forgot to cc this to the list > so yes, seems simple enough and i've already done what > you asked, but i haven't replaced the current one with > the one i just modified of course, i'll try to rebuild > with the new changes after about 24 hours if no one > else has a better suggestion or gives me a reason not > to do so by then > > thanks > > Nathanael > --- Bin Ren wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'm using 5.2-current. Maybe the file has >> been updated. The patch is very very simple: >> replace two lines with 6 lines. Is it possible >> for you to apply the patch manually? Line >> number is in the patch file. Thanks. >> >> You must be 'root' to have write permission. >> >> -- Bin >> > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Search - Find what you=92re looking for faster > http://search.yahoo.com >