From owner-freebsd-alpha Tue Apr 2 15:31:54 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-alpha@freebsd.org Received: from srv1.cosmo-project.de (srv1.cosmo-project.de [213.83.6.106]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4ABA237B4E3 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 15:30:39 -0800 (PST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by srv1.cosmo-project.de (8.11.6/8.11.6) with UUCP id g32NUUP69351; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 01:30:31 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ticso@cicely8.cicely.de) Received: from cicely8.cicely.de (cicely8.cicely.de [10.1.1.10]) by cicely5.cicely.de (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id g32NMm6e086566; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 01:22:48 +0200 (CEST)?g (envelope-from ticso@cicely8.cicely.de) Received: from cicely8.cicely.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cicely8.cicely.de (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g32NMknU046224; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 01:22:46 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ticso@cicely8.cicely.de) Received: (from ticso@localhost) by cicely8.cicely.de (8.12.2/8.12.2/Submit) id g32NMjEL046223; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 01:22:45 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 01:22:45 +0200 From: Bernd Walter To: Wilko Bulte Cc: Christian Weisgerber , freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Source of "processor correctable error"? Message-ID: <20020402232244.GP41357@cicely8.cicely.de> References: <20020401152244.GE41357@cicely8.cicely.de> <20020402163220.GO41357@cicely8.cicely.de> <20020402192425.B43540@freebie.xs4all.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020402192425.B43540@freebie.xs4all.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.26i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD cicely8.cicely.de 5.0-CURRENT i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 07:24:25PM +0200, Wilko Bulte wrote: > On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 06:32:20PM +0200, Bernd Walter wrote: > > Generaly speaking they have to be the same because the are all > > addressed in a single bank and so claims the documentation. > > But practical speaking you could try a random vendor 24 chip simm > > with a very good success chance. > > I wouldn't try to mix with a 18 chip simm. > > Theoreticaly even edo should work, but you don't get a speed gain > > and they are rare. > > Are you absolutely sure? I don't think we ever used EDO *SIMMs* > on Alpha machines. EDO and fastpage are nearly the same. EDO only has a longer data output phase while traditional fast page go into tri-state. The speed gain is that you can already take the steps for the next access, while still taking the current data. If you have a board not doing bank interleaving they are often interchangeable as the small difference doesn't matter. > There are some boxes using EDO *DIMMs* (like the AS500 > sitting next to me) Nice shoot - it's the same chipset (21172) as the PC164... But no sign of a possible speed gain in the chipset docs. They should work with identic speed as fastpage. -- B.Walter COSMO-Project http://www.cosmo-project.de ticso@cicely.de Usergroup info@cosmo-project.de To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message