From: emmel <the_emmel@gmx.net>
To: Dominik Brodowski <linux@brodo.de>
Cc: cpufreq@www.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: powernow-k7 (again) on 2.4.20
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 07:10:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <03072407104700.00210@gate> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030723163415.GA1870@brodo.de>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 23 July 2003 18:34, you wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > But I *had* it working correctly once. I guess it has something to do -
> > the only things I changed are some kernel options and I didn't apply the
> > swsp patch to the kernel I'm running now (it doesn't work anyway).
> > However, I had it working correctly before and with a 2.4.20 kernel. It
> > wouldn't strike me as odd if it hadn't. Well, in any case I have to know
> > if loading the module really slows the comp down, or if the data is just
> > a bit weird. Where's that bogomips tool that has been mentioned here now
> > and again?
>
> Unfortunately, I don't know where that bogomips tool is. Sorry. Never used
> it myself... I just keep asking others about it :-)
> Now to the BUG() - have you upgraded your BIOS in the meantime? Had you
> patched the previous (working) kernel with the out-of-tree rtdvs patch
> which uses a different (and partly wrong) implementation of powernow-k7? Or
> did you patch it with one of the "override" patches available?
>
> Dominik
As I said the only difference is that I didn't patch it with swsp (software
suspemd) this time; I did before. And then there's still the possibility that
some obscure kernel configuration was the cause. The kernel I'm running now
has been completely reconfigured since I managed to lose my old .config for
it :-( And AFAIR I applied exactly the same cpufreq patch (and acpi patch) to
it. Still had them lying around in my source directory.
- --
emmel <the_emmel@gmx.net>
Official AGC feedback maniac
"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."
"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."
"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better... :)
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."
GPG 1.2.1 signed
Fingerprint: 60B4 D8E3 9617 900C 6726 168F D677 5AAD D40F CCE7
Certserver : ldap://certserver.pgp.com
Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE/H2pk1ndardQPzOcRAkQAAJ9Ercs+mtgaUKzynkmoa6DO6QGsrwCfdZ0h
KywsRW/WYnxkxm44P2raj8k=
=Xsnu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-07-24 5:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-07-21 6:30 powernow-k7 (again) on 2.4.20 emmel
2003-07-22 11:58 ` Dominik Brodowski
[not found] ` <03072308501000.00222@gate>
[not found] ` <20030723163415.GA1870@brodo.de>
2003-07-24 5:10 ` emmel [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=03072407104700.00210@gate \
--to=the_emmel@gmx.net \
--cc=cpufreq@www.linux.org.uk \
--cc=linux@brodo.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox