lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [May]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: IO-APIC on nforce2 [PATCH] + [PATCH] for nmi_debug=1 + [PATCH] for idle=C1halt, 2.6.5
Craig Bradney wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-05-17 at 17:26, Prakash K. Cheemplavam wrote:
>
>>Hi all,
>>
>>I just made an interesting finding and would like to have comments from
>>NVidia:
>>
>>Chip Current Value New Value
>>C17 1F0FFF01 1F01FF01
>>C18D 9F0FFF01 9F01FF01
>>
>>In fact I have the newer chip revision (lspci says c1), but due to a
>>post at Abit Forums I tried to use the value for the older revision on
>>my board, and guess what: I never had such low idle temps! I am
>>currently even using nvidia binary graphics driver and usually I would
>>be having around 49-51°C idle temp, but now it is around 45°C, and it
>>was not the first boot (then the mobo usually shows 5°C less). Instead
>>the temp steadily fell from >50°C to 45°C.
>>
>>(esp @nvidia:) Is there anything evil using the old chip's value for the
>>new chip? So far I haven't noticed any bad thing about it. Perhaps some
>>daring nforce2 user with the new revision should try as well.
>>
>
>
> Isnt it the case that that change is the one that brings about
> stability? Was indicated before to be the main causing c1halt crashes.

Nope, I am changing the 9F to 1F. The "stability byte" was changing the
0F to 01. I am no using 1F01FF01 instead of 9F01FF01. I guess I wasn't
clear enough.

Prakash
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:03    [W:1.492 / U:0.160 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site