On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 4:07 PM, ron minnich rminn...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe it is a difference in view. The address is 7 bits in all the
docs. How it is laid out in the register and on the bits on the wire
is really a different concern.
Sorry for the dead horse revival, but I was just looking
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Tom Sylla tsy...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 4:07 PM, ron minnich rminn...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe it is a difference in view. The address is 7 bits in all the
docs. How it is laid out in the register and on the bits on the wire
is really a different
ron minnich wrote:
BTW, THANKS for the note. I was hoping for a note from an expert :-)
That leading bytes sure looked like SPD but my obsolete JDEC docs threw me
off.
Now I wonder why I only see one SPD ... but that's grist for another
note in little bit.
Thanks
ron
What other
I'll poll the whole smbus monday. One problem is it doesn't seem to
work at all under factory bios -- Linux can't get to it. I expect the
BMC is, once again, getting in the way.
ron
--
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
On Thu, 1 Oct 2009 20:39:40 -0700, ron minnich rminn...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 6:21 PM, Joseph Smith j...@settoplinux.org wrote:
That doesn't look right at all! Shouldn't your dimms be at smbus 0x50
and
0x51? What SuperIO is this?
not at all, DIMMS can run from 50-57.
On 02.10.2009 13:29, Joseph Smith wrote:
On Thu, 1 Oct 2009 20:39:40 -0700, ron minnich rminn...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 6:21 PM, Joseph Smith j...@settoplinux.org wrote:
That doesn't look right at all! Shouldn't your dimms be at smbus 0x50
and 0x51? What SuperIO is
On Thu, 1 Oct 2009 20:39:40 -0700, ron minnich rminn...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 6:21 PM, Joseph Smith j...@settoplinux.org wrote:
That doesn't look right at all! Shouldn't your dimms be at smbus 0x50
and
0x51? What SuperIO is this?
not at all, DIMMS can run from 50-57.
On 02.10.2009 13:46, Joseph Smith wrote:
On Thu, 1 Oct 2009 20:39:40 -0700, ron minnich rminn...@gmail.com wrote:
I think one of those SPD dumps is good, one bad, but I want to see
what anyone else thinks.
You know Ron you could always compare the JEDEC registers with the dimms
On Fri, 02 Oct 2009 13:53:43 +0200, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger
c-d.hailfinger.devel.2...@gmx.net wrote:
On 02.10.2009 13:46, Joseph Smith wrote:
On Thu, 1 Oct 2009 20:39:40 -0700, ron minnich rminn...@gmail.com
wrote:
I think one of those SPD dumps is good, one bad, but I want to see
what
OK, well, I did not quite get the answers I hoped for. So here go my comments:
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 5:04 PM, ron minnich rminn...@gmail.com wrote:
dimm 50
00: bad device: 01
dimm 51
00: bad device: 01
dimm 52
00: bad device: 01
dimm 53
00: bad device: 01
obviously bad.
dimm
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 4:53 AM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger
c-d.hailfinger.devel.2...@gmx.net wrote:
decode-dimms (or decode-dimms.pl) from lm-sensors is extremely useful
for this. Run it on a working system and it will dump the content of all
SPDs and show the meaning of the values stored there.
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 12:53 PM, ron minnich rminn...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 4:53 AM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger
The lm_sensors tools are handy when everything is working fine.
They're not when things are not. In my case, things are not and,
sadly, the tools are largely useless --
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 11:41 AM, Tom Sylla tsy...@gmail.com wrote:
As a side rant, why does do Linux and coreboot insist on referring to
SMBus addresses shifted right byte one bit? They are 7 bits long, and
should be *left* justified in the byte. Take a look at every SMBus
controller, and you
BTW, THANKS for the note. I was hoping for a note from an expert :-)
That leading bytes sure looked like SPD but my obsolete JDEC docs threw me off.
Now I wonder why I only see one SPD ... but that's grist for another
note in little bit.
Thanks
ron
--
coreboot mailing list:
On 10/02/2009 04:09 PM, ron minnich wrote:
BTW, THANKS for the note. I was hoping for a note from an expert :-)
:-(
--
Thanks,
Joseph Smith
Set-Top-Linux
www.settoplinux.org
--
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 6:31 PM, Joseph Smith j...@settoplinux.org wrote:
On 10/02/2009 04:09 PM, ron minnich wrote:
BTW, THANKS for the note. I was hoping for a note from an expert :-)
Joseph, don't feel bad; I clearly don't know much about this stuff either :-)
That's why I'm glad we have
This looks to me like I'm mostly reading garbage from SPD -- comments anyone?
dimm 50
00: bad device: 01
dimm 51
00: bad device: 01
dimm 52
00: bad device: 01
dimm 53
00: bad device: 01
dimm 54
00: ad db de c0 01 00 00 00 01 f0 fa fa 00 00 00 d9
10: 00 00 00 00 00 00 6c 01 00 00 00 00 00
On 10/01/2009 08:04 PM, ron minnich wrote:
This looks to me like I'm mostly reading garbage from SPD -- comments anyone?
dimm 50
00: bad device: 01
dimm 51
00: bad device: 01
dimm 52
00: bad device: 01
dimm 53
00: bad device: 01
dimm 54
00: ad db de c0 01 00 00 00 01 f0 fa fa 00 00 00
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 6:21 PM, Joseph Smith j...@settoplinux.org wrote:
That doesn't look right at all! Shouldn't your dimms be at smbus 0x50 and
0x51? What SuperIO is this?
not at all, DIMMS can run from 50-57.
I think one of those SPD dumps is good, one bad, but I want to see
what anyone
19 matches
Mail list logo
