on my pc164lx running woody 2.4.18 kernel with 512M mem. read #1022 of 16384 bytes read #1023 of 16384 bytes read #1024 of 16384 bytes done with read of /dev/mem (returned 1). sumFile() succeeded. ganesha:~# cat /proc/cpuinfo cpu : Alpha cpu model : EV56 cpu variation : 7 cpu revision : 0 cpu serial number : system type : EB164 system variation : LX164 system revision : 0 system serial number : cycle frequency [Hz] : 533333333 timer frequency [Hz] : 1024.00 page size [bytes] : 8192 phys. address bits : 40 max. addr. space # : 127 BogoMIPS : 1057.24 kernel unaligned acc : 0 (pc=0,va=0) user unaligned acc : 0 (pc=0,va=0) platform string : Digital AlphaPC 164LX 533 MHz cpus detected : 1
on my pc164ux woody 2.4.18 kernel, 512M memory, same result cpu : Alpha cpu model : EV56 cpu variation : 0 cpu revision : 0 cpu serial number : Linux_is_Great! system type : Ruffian system variation : 0 system revision : 0 system serial number : MILO-/aux/KERNE cycle frequency [Hz] : 600000000 timer frequency [Hz] : 1024.00 page size [bytes] : 8192 phys. address bits : 40 max. addr. space # : 127 BogoMIPS : 1187.96 kernel unaligned acc : 0 (pc=0,va=0) user unaligned acc : 0 (pc=0,va=0) platform string : N/A cpus detected : 0 On Mon, 26 Aug 2002 01:20:33 -0500 Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The long story, for those interested: > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-x/2002/debian-x-200208/msg00091.html > > (and read the whole thread) > > The short story: > > I need people with root on machines of your given architecture to > compile and run the attached C program. It consists of code borrowed > from xdm's genauth.c program. > > The X Strike Force is trying to determine for which architectures it's a > bad idea to read several megabytes of data sequentially from /dev/mem, > because this is exactly what XDM currently does when generating an > XDM-AUTHORIZATION-1 cookie. > > Be warned: on at least some architectures (notably IA-64), this sort of > read has been known to cause untrapped machine checks (a.k.a., lockups > or spontaneous reboots). Arguably the kernel should trap this sort of > nonsense, so you may be in the mood to file a bug against "kernel" after > running this program. > > I and the other folks at the X Strike Force need to know the following > things: > > 1) whether or not this program works when you run it without arguments > 2) if scenario 1) causes problems, what the last line of output was > 3) if scenario 1) causes problems, whether invoking this program with > the argument "fragile" helps it > 4) if scenario 3) causes problems, what the last line of output was > > Remember, this program must be run as root. If normal users can read > from /dev/mem on your machine, you're in trouble. :) > > -- > G. Branden Robinson | No math genius, eh? Then > perhaps Debian GNU/Linux | you could explain to me > where you [EMAIL PROTECTED] | got these... > PENROSE TILES! http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Stephen R. > Notley >