Re: Cyrix kernel patch
Paul Miller wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Oct 1997, Shaleh wrote:
> > I have never had an ounce of problem with my chip. I have a 150+ that
> > behaves well. The problem I have seen is that everyone uses the wrong
> > clock setup. My 150+ is actually a 120Mhz. The other problem I have
> > seen is that not everyone makes motherboards that behave well with
> > cyrix/IBM chips. We use several cyrix/IBM's here at work and have sold
> > many IBM 200+'s to customers. No problems. I just want my boot to say
> > CyrixInstead 6x86 instead of unknown 486. set6x86 has solved my heat
> > concerns in my rather unventilated case.
My chip is clocked at 120 ( I am leary of overclocking). set6x86
enables the cpu halt command, which lowers power usage on the cpu to 10%
when the cpu is idle (most are idle about 70-90% of the time ). I can
touch both my motherboard sink and cpu heatsink. Very noticeable
difference. I tried to add the cyrix patch but it did not agree with my
kernel. I am running 2.0.29. I do not know enough kernel internals to
add a patch by hand.
> Do you clock your chip at 120 or 150 then? Mine is a 166+ (133) clocked
> at 166MHz and it works perfectly. In Linux, I have the Cryix patches
> compiled, but only for the reconition. I ran into trouble when I tried
> some of the options.. perhaps because I have a IBM 6x86 instead of Cryix.
> Also, I've never used the set6x86 program. What does it do? I've never
> had heat problems with my high powered 12V jet fan.
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org .