longhaul: Unknown VIA CPU

longhaul: Unknown VIA CPU

[Vincent Stehlé]

Hi,

I tried to get the longhaul module to work on my VIA EPIA M10000 
motherboard (C3-2 cpu), but I did not succeed yet.

I use cpufreq 2.4.21-2, and I see the following message in the syslog 
when I "modprobe longhaul":

     longhaul: Unknown VIA CPU. Contact davej@suse.de

I'd be pleased to help with what seems to be a "new" cpu, but I do not 
know what to begin with.

Here is my /proc/cpuinfo; don't know if this is of any use to anyone (:

---
processor       : 0
vendor_id       : CentaurHauls
cpu family      : 6
model           : 9
model name      : VIA Nehemiah
stepping        : 1
cpu MHz         : 999.531
cache size      : 64 KB
fdiv_bug        : no
hlt_bug         : no
f00f_bug        : no
coma_bug        : no
fpu             : yes
fpu_exception   : yes
cpuid level     : 1
wp              : yes
flags           : fpu de tsc msr mtrr pge cmov mmx fxsr sse
bogomips        : 1992.29
---

Regards,

-- 
Vincent Stehlé

Re: longhaul: Unknown VIA CPU

[Dave Jones]

On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 12:23:59AM +0200, Vincent Stehl? wrote:
 > I tried to get the longhaul module to work on my VIA EPIA M10000 
 > motherboard (C3-2 cpu), but I did not succeed yet.
 > 
 > I use cpufreq 2.4.21-2, and I see the following message in the syslog 
 > when I "modprobe longhaul":
 > 
 >     longhaul: Unknown VIA CPU. Contact davej@suse.de
 > 
 > I'd be pleased to help with what seems to be a "new" cpu, but I do not 
 > know what to begin with.

Nehemiah is still unsupported as I've not seen a production one thats
actually capable of working properly yet. Still waiting to hear back
from the folks at Centaur.

		Dave

-- 
 Dave Jones     http://www.codemonkey.org.uk

Re: longhaul: Unknown VIA CPU

[Sven Dowideit]

I sent DaveJones a patch that at least says that the Nehemiah is not
implemented, but i have not heard from him since..  also, the email
address will need to be changed to the codemonkey one :)

However, VIA have not yet made that info available to the public (I'm
hoping Dave has a copy)

sven

On Wed, 2003-09-03 at 08:23, Vincent Stehlé wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I tried to get the longhaul module to work on my VIA EPIA M10000 
> motherboard (C3-2 cpu), but I did not succeed yet.
> 
> I use cpufreq 2.4.21-2, and I see the following message in the syslog 
> when I "modprobe longhaul":
> 
>      longhaul: Unknown VIA CPU. Contact davej@suse.de
> 
> I'd be pleased to help with what seems to be a "new" cpu, but I do not 
> know what to begin with.
> 
> Here is my /proc/cpuinfo; don't know if this is of any use to anyone (:
> 
> ---
> processor       : 0
> vendor_id       : CentaurHauls
> cpu family      : 6
> model           : 9
> model name      : VIA Nehemiah
> stepping        : 1
> cpu MHz         : 999.531
> cache size      : 64 KB
> fdiv_bug        : no
> hlt_bug         : no
> f00f_bug        : no
> coma_bug        : no
> fpu             : yes
> fpu_exception   : yes
> cpuid level     : 1
> wp              : yes
> flags           : fpu de tsc msr mtrr pge cmov mmx fxsr sse
> bogomips        : 1992.29
> ---
> 
> Regards,

Re: longhaul: Unknown VIA CPU

[Dave Jones]

On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 11:49:55PM +1000, Sven Dowideit wrote:
 > I sent DaveJones a patch that at least says that the Nehemiah is not
 > implemented, but i have not heard from him since..

sorry, I thought I replied..

 > also, the email
 > address will need to be changed to the codemonkey one :)

Already fixed in 2.6, not sure about the 2.4/2.4-ac backports.

 > However, VIA have not yet made that info available to the public (I'm
 > hoping Dave has a copy)

I have the relevant documentation, and a Nehemiah that should support
power scaling, however when I try to use it according to how the spec
says I should I get nonsense returned from certain MSRs, and no speed
change.  I'm still waiting to hear back from Centaur.

I pinged them again yesterday, hopefully I can get an answer on
this pretty soon.

		Dave

-- 
 Dave Jones     http://www.codemonkey.org.uk

Re: longhaul: Unknown VIA CPU

[Ducrot Bruno]

On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 01:00:39PM +0100, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 11:49:55PM +1000, Sven Dowideit wrote:
>  > I sent DaveJones a patch that at least says that the Nehemiah is not
>  > implemented, but i have not heard from him since..
> 
> sorry, I thought I replied..
> 
>  > also, the email
>  > address will need to be changed to the codemonkey one :)
> 
> Already fixed in 2.6, not sure about the 2.4/2.4-ac backports.

ducrot@neptune:~$ cvs rdiff -u -r LINUX_2_4 -rLINUX_2_5 cpufreq/linux/arch/i386/kernel/cpufreq/longhaul.c
Index: cpufreq/linux/arch/i386/kernel/cpufreq/longhaul.c
diff -u cpufreq/linux/arch/i386/kernel/cpufreq/longhaul.c:1.1.1.1 cpufreq/linux/arch/i386/kernel/cpufreq/longhaul.c:1.93
--- cpufreq/linux/arch/i386/kernel/cpufreq/longhaul.c:1.1.1.1   Mon Aug 25 15:58:46 2003
+++ cpufreq/linux/arch/i386/kernel/cpufreq/longhaul.c   Tue Aug 19 14:38:32 2003
@@ -597,6 +597,7 @@
        .target         = longhaul_target,
        .init           = longhaul_cpu_init,
        .name           = "longhaul",
+       .owner          = THIS_MODULE,
 };
 
 static int __init longhaul_init (void)
ducrot@neptune:~$ cvs rdiff -u -r LINUX_2_4 -rLINUX_2_5 cpufreq/linux/arch/i386/kernel/cpufreq/longhaul.h



-- 
Ducrot Bruno

--  Which is worse:  ignorance or apathy?
--  Don't know.  Don't care.

Re: longhaul: Unknown VIA CPU

[Dave Jones]

On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 02:52:04PM +0200, Ducrot Bruno wrote:
 > >  > also, the email
 > >  > address will need to be changed to the codemonkey one :)
 > > 
 > > Already fixed in 2.6, not sure about the 2.4/2.4-ac backports.
 > 
 > ducrot@neptune:~$ cvs rdiff -u -r LINUX_2_4 -rLINUX_2_5 cpufreq/linux/arch/i386/kernel/cpufreq/longhaul.c

I'm not sure if I pushed the changes back to CVS after merging to
2.5 mainline.

		Dave

-- 
 Dave Jones     http://www.codemonkey.org.uk

Re: longhaul: Unknown VIA CPU

[Ducrot Bruno]

On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 02:24:57PM +0100, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 02:52:04PM +0200, Ducrot Bruno wrote:
>  > >  > also, the email
>  > >  > address will need to be changed to the codemonkey one :)
>  > > 
>  > > Already fixed in 2.6, not sure about the 2.4/2.4-ac backports.
>  > 
>  > ducrot@neptune:~$ cvs rdiff -u -r LINUX_2_4 -rLINUX_2_5 cpufreq/linux/arch/i386/kernel/cpufreq/longhaul.c
> 
> I'm not sure if I pushed the changes back to CVS after merging to
> 2.5 mainline.

ducrot@neptune:~$ diff -u ~/tmp/cpufreq/25/cpufreq/linux/arch/i386/kernel/cpufreq/longhaul.c \
	/var/share/cvs/bitkeeper/cpufreq-2.5/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/longhaul.c
@@ -584,7 +584,7 @@
        if (ret != 0)
                return ret;
 
-       policy->governor = CPUFREQ_DEFAULT_GOVERNOR;
+       policy->policy = CPUFREQ_POLICY_PERFORMANCE;
        policy->cpuinfo.transition_latency = CPUFREQ_ETERNAL;
 
        policy->cur = (unsigned int) (longhaul_get_cpu_fsb() * longhaul_get_cpu_mult() * 100);

(cvs don't have some core update).

Cheers,

-- 
Ducrot Bruno

--  Which is worse:  ignorance or apathy?
--  Don't know.  Don't care.