Re: 64 Bit?
Andrew E. Mileski (msmith@quix.robins.af.mil)
Wed, 4 Dec 1996 10:16:27 -0500 (GMT)
> Just a little note on 133 clock rates. Linux (and possibly other 32-bit
> Os'es) has a little *hic-up* with 133Mhz because of some "funny math"
> that's done to get the clock-rate up to 133. We're migrating off a 133
> as we speak down to a 100 and increasing RAM and CACHE to compensate.
> Typical kernel upgrades for us have been usually a 4 to 5 hour deal
> because the root partition was hit and being stuck recovering files from
> either backup tape or the lost+found after a few e2fsck's. I'm solely
> speaking from our experiences in-house; but I thought I'ld pass that
> on. Has anyone else had *fun* with 133's?
Funny math? If anything, 133 is the least funny considering 66Mhz bus (x2).
120 and 150 is funny. 60 and 90 are just plain hilarious.
Our 133s run just fine, but that doesn't help you.
Melvin