🚀 go-pugleaf

On 21 Jun 97 15:07:02 , Tony Langdon <tlang@freeway.DIALix.oz.au> wrote:
>It's 20 Jun 97  00:47,
>We'll return to bnh@aughra.glasswings.com.au and All's
>discussion of *HELP! -> AMD K5 and linux!*

>Hmm, it almost sounds like some sort of memory cache bug or
>incompatibility.  Try turning off the secondary RAM cache, see if that
>makes any difference.  If it doesn't, try turning off the on board
>cache.  Your symptoms sound almost exactly like a laptop at work which
>had a  buggy cache on the processor.  Worked fine under DOS and Win 3.x,
>but as soon as we installed Win 95 it kept crashing with wierd errors.
>The distributor suggested turning off the on board cache, and all was
>well.  They've since replaced the processor for free.
>
I've grabbed a IBM 686L PR 166 from the shop and this one seems to run so
far with very few bugs (the odd hiccup but nothing major yet.)

So it looks like the AMD chip was the problem, either it itsef was faulty
or the latest versions of linux have some sort of incompatability.

Personally I agree with Tony that it is probably a memory cache problem, 
especially since doing the same thing twice would not give the same error.
playing with all the cmos settings for the various caches etc didn't change
anything. 

Anyway I'm going to hold onto the 686 for a few more days and if I still
have no problems with it I'll give the $20 difference to the shop and keep the
686 chip. 

It is also interesting that when I took the mb and amd chip in we wired it up
to their hardrives etc and windows 95 ran fine. So either it is a linux 
peculiarity or its a combination of my sdram and the cpu (we were using normal
edo ram for the shop win95 test). Isn't pc harware a pain :P

Ben.