Very Computer

I'm trying to do a network install of FreeBSD 4.0-RELEASE and everything is
fine up to the joint after I connect to the server.  Then I get the message
"Signal 11 caught!"  What is that and how can I solve the problem so I can
actually use FreeBSD.  I've come from being a Linux user for about a year
and would like to get FreeBSD to work.  I even deleted that partition (don't
have that big of a hard drive) to get FreeBSD on.  Although I didn't have
anything significant on the partition so it doesn't matter much.  I tried to
download the 4.0 iso and install using that, but I got some message that
said something "_elf" something else. Don't remember exactly what it said.
Thank anyone for there help in advance.  And please Rev. Don Kool, please
stay away from my postings unless you have something that is important to
say.  I don't want to be another victim of stupid comments.

Quote:> I'm trying to do a network install of FreeBSD 4.0-RELEASE and everything is
> fine up to the joint after I connect to the server.  Then I get the message
> "Signal 11 caught!"  What is that and how can I solve the problem so I can
> actually use FreeBSD.  I've come from being a Linux user for about a year

Sig 11 is typically triggered by bad hardware especially toasted
memory.  You might get a sig 11 if your system is running too hot
or you are overclocking.  

--
Steve

Oh, um, correct on count two. I am overclocking. I have a Cyrix MII 225MHz
(PR-300, I hate PR ratings) overclocked to 375MHz.  Runs a little slow for
my taste otherwise.  Is it possible to get around sig 11 and install FreeBSD
anyway?  I know I shouldn't overclock my computer, but I did it Tuesday and
I do not want to go back.

Quote:> Sig 11 is typically triggered by bad hardware especially toasted
> memory.  You might get a sig 11 if your system is running too hot
> or you are overclocking.

Quote:> Oh, um, correct on count two. I am overclocking. I have a Cyrix MII 225MHz
> (PR-300, I hate PR ratings) overclocked to 375MHz.  Runs a little slow for
> my taste otherwise.  Is it possible to get around sig 11 and install FreeBSD
> anyway?

Not likely.  FreeBSD's virtual memory push a systems to its
limits.  If you overclock, you're probably pushing a component
beyond its rated timing.

--
Steve

SIG 11 is _not_ the computer detecting you are overclocking.

SIG 11 means you have some serious hardware trouble at hand. Signal
11 measn 'Segmentation violation') - your software tries to
access memory it is not entitled to (or even that doesn't exist).

With software that is known to work this is typically (though of course
not always) a sign of memory corruption.

Apparently your overclocking does not work reliably, and I suggest
stopping it immediately. You will not get a stable system this way
and most likely loose data.

Regards

Christoph Weber-Fahr

--

--------------------------  My personal opinion only    ---------------------

How would overclocking the processor affect the memory?  I only changed the
jumper settings for the processor's clock speed, not the motherboard.  The
clock speed for the motherboard was 75MHz and is still 75MHz. The clock
speed for the processor was 225Mhz and is now 375MHz.  I don't see how the
two are related to each other in a way that would cause that problem.  So
therefore it most likely not my hardware and the effect overclocking has on
it.

Quote:> SIG 11 means you have some serious hardware trouble at hand. Signal
> 11 measn 'Segmentation violation') - your software tries to
> access memory it is not entitled to (or even that doesn't exist).

> With software that is known to work this is typically (though of course
> not always) a sign of memory corruption.

> Apparently your overclocking does not work reliably, and I suggest
> stopping it immediately. You will not get a stable system this way
> and most likely loose data.

Umhm... Except that ideal memory will not help you if the data in the
on-processor cache are shitted - it will faithfully store them. Garbage
in, garbage out... Let alone the situation when processor adds two numbers
to calculate a pointer into array, gets the wrong result and later tries
to read from that address. Surprise, surprise, it doesn't get what is stored
at the correct address. Ditto for situation when you store the address in
register only to find out that dozen cycles later couple of bits in that
register got flipped, yodda, yodda. Or instructions prefetched six cycles
ago and ready to be executed now look slightly different than what you've
read from memory back then.

Overclocking _may_ be OK, but that's a gamble. Not all chips pass the tests.
Raise the frequency and more of them will fail. In the best case your processor
had never been tested for 375MHz. Because if it had been tested for that it
was supposed to be sold with higher clock rate (otherwise nobody would bother
testing) and the fact that it wasn't sold that way means that it had failed.
Anyway, looks like it _doesn't_ pass the test. Tough luck. Unreliable processor
-> unreliable system. You've gambled and lost. Consider yourself lucky if it
will turn out that all you had lost is your time. It might be data on disk.

--
"You're one of those condescending Unix computer users!"
"Here's a nickel, kid.  Get yourself a better computer" - Dilbert.

Umm, by what?  You're overclocking by 67 %?!  If i were you, i would
be _very happy_ that the CPU even survived that so far, not to mention
correct operation in any way.  You must be kidding...  Something like
overclocking by 10 % might be feasible without any destruction, but 67
% is definately going to kill it, sooner or later.

All those kids who don't even have gotten real names by there
parents... you wouldn't believe what fools they are. :-%

Joerg, typing this on a P133 which is definately not overclocked :),
but which also survived something like 4 years now and is still doing
the job...
--
cheers, J"org  /  73 de DL8DTL

Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)

I have a P166 myself...  It's adequate for the stuff I need it to do,
even watching RealPlayer videos and playing mp3's.  Of course, if I
listen to mp3's, I can't really do much else, except use pine. 8-)

- Donn

- if you change the system (bus) speed as well you affect memory directly
  FWIW, I've never heard of 75MHz 'regular' systems.

- if you overclock your processor, you might make it unstable. Some
  simply don't work properly then. It's a matter of heat and other
  factors

Regards

Christoph Weber-Fahr

--

--------------------------  My personal opinion only    ---------------------

That is a good point.

Quote:> Umhm... Except that ideal memory will not help you if the data in the
> on-processor cache are shitted - it will faithfully store them. Garbage
> in, garbage out... Let alone the situation when processor adds two numbers
> to calculate a pointer into array, gets the wrong result and later tries
> to read from that address. Surprise, surprise, it doesn't get what is
stored
> at the correct address. Ditto for situation when you store the address in
> register only to find out that dozen cycles later couple of bits in that
> register got flipped, yodda, yodda. Or instructions prefetched six cycles
> ago and ready to be executed now look slightly different than what you've
> read from memory back then.

My computer is operating very well, although I do not think that my
processor will last anywhere near as long it should considering what I am
doing to it.  I am planning to buy a K6 to put in this machine because of
its higher FPU performance.  I think I am going to reduce it to 300MHz just
so it will survive until then.

I have a real name.  I am just not using it.  Hey, I am still * and
my parents will kill me if I use my real name in a newsgroup.  I would, but
I have to have someplace to live.

Yeah, a P133 can do the job well.  I usually am playing MP3's, surfing,
reading a newsgroup, and instant messaging someone though, and that is
pretty difficult to do with a 225, let alone P133. I even have 92 MB of
memory and it is still a bit slow.  So unless somebody would like to buy me
a new computer, I am able to get enough money to put one together, or by
some other miracle I am stuck with this.

Quote:> Umm, by what?  You're overclocking by 67 %?!  If i were you, i would
> be _very happy_ that the CPU even survived that so far, not to mention
> correct operation in any way.  You must be kidding...  Something like
> overclocking by 10 % might be feasible without any destruction, but 67
> % is definately going to kill it, sooner or later.

> All those kids who don't even have gotten real names by there
> parents... you wouldn't believe what fools they are. :-%

> Joerg, typing this on a P133 which is definately not overclocked :),
> but which also survived something like 4 years now and is still doing
> the job...