@Capehill

Okay, yes, can see that. Thanks for explanation.

@Capehill

Thanks. Looks nice and useful. Sometimes my CPU goes up just after booting.

What I found is, when my CPU clock suddenly listed high CPU after booting Workbench, is that CPUCLock appears to be the culprit. It listed about 97% usage but the priority is -128 or close to. It shouldn't be that high and shouldn't get so much CPU time to register as such. But maybe something is putting it off.

@joerg

Quote:

That thread was mostly discussion then I found some links on the end.

But what I meant was a command or tool built in. It's becoming common that I find or rather don't find what I thought would be an obvious tool built into the OS. It's likely using what other OS has and then I realise something so obvious like even a basic process monitor doesn't come with OS4.

@noXLar

It does give a clue thanks. There is source with memory test commands which gives an indication what it is doing. But it does differ on X1000 so not fully clear what else it is doing.

@Raziel

Thanks. Yeah, CFE wasn't meant to run on PPC, yet alone run on a desktop mobo so no surprises it had some quirks. Plus it was hacked by whomever to run OF binaries. It would have been useful if it was actually useful in diagnosing issues such as reboot loops, CFE crashing on boot and crashing during loading.

Hi guys.

I've been trying to understand the CFE memory tests for years. I have found no info on what they mean. And I so far cannot decipher the output of it. CFE commands testdram and memorytest appear to work fine. But randmemtest spews out a bunch of 64 bit numbers I don't get and hangs the machine. Is it normal for it to do this? CFE does have bugs so thought this might be another bug. The output implies some error and the hang isn't a good sign.

So here is output with one 2GB RAM stick inserted. I can't make any sense of it. Do other people get senseless results and a hang as well?

@daveyw

Okay I see. By the looks of it there isn't a command to do that. I think that is slightly lower level as that descends into DOS internals. We don't even have a top command. I didn't realise it until I needed it that we can't even do something as simple as listing current tasks. To see what is hogging CPU.

The suggestion for a DOS function maybe the way to go if you use ARexx as ARexx can call library functions. I'm not sure if ARexx can actually list open files but ARexx tends to go deeper than what DOS scripts can provide.

Aside from that writing your own binary to use as a command is another solution but more work. However sometimes it's needed on AmigaOS.

I installed it to my OS4 emulation and installing was even slower than copying it to RAM.

It seemed to run okay after. I did have a freeze but it was only when downloading it and it invalidated my HDD image and kept making it freeze on boot. Never did that before. But I'm running FS-UAE. Maybe latest has a bug that freezes OS4.

So can confirm the corruption on 8 bit. It seems to change the palette but doesn't restore it when you quit. There is also some other bug. I tried to change screenmode back but it kept closing and reopening the screen and complaining about windows. I think this is a recent bug in the whole system as I've seen it on real hardware like X1000. For fun, after palette corruption, open ScreenMode for a funny effect.

So I have a RGB16 bit mode set in P4 mode. You may have to see if both UAE and P4 can be added as cards. Then see if you can run CodeBench on P4 screen only. If not use 16 but mode.

I tried to add UAE as graphic card but it didn't show up. This maybe because I'm using FS-UAE and it has presets for OS4. It also lacks support that WinUAE has like adding folder drives, so internal hooks aren't fully supported like in WinUAE, which could explain why UAEGFX won't work with my OS4.

@daveyw

There's one thing only the built in USB can do and that's boot off USB. Slow but works. Well 13MB seems slow to me.

Also, I found SanDisk sticks can be hot plugged directly in the ports. No need for resistor hacks or hubs. I have some SanDisk stick and when I plug in and pull them out of the back ports they are detected.

@Reth

What depth is your Workbench? I'd say it needs 16 or 24 bit display. At least CodeBench expects that regardless of needing it. I've seen similar corruption before, sometimes on planar, but hard to tell if it's OS issue or UAEGFX has some bug or a combination of both.

@daveyw

Would Snoopy give a list? Possibly Ranger as it can list some files handles. I've used it before to check on some files before.

@walkero

I can't imagine how anyone would survive with only USB1.1 on an AmigaOne. Until I retired my XE it would have driven me crazy being stuck at such slow speeds.

The Spider is a rebranded NEC. IIRC I plugged one in my XE and it worked fine. They change the PCI ID in the firmware or something to turn it into a special Amiga PCI card you pay extra for.

From the above I would recommend NEC. It's just I've had trouble with VIA and I gave up. I bought a VIA card and by all counts it had the same exact PCI IDs as the working VIA card listed but it just crashed and burned in USB2 mode. I then picked up an NEC card and it worked off the bat. Funny as it was almost ten years since I gave up on that and then got an email earlier this year about debugging why my VIA USB2 card crashes. LOL. The investigation goes on.

@davec555

What are the power ratings between the old and new CPU?

When the serial cable arrives it will be interesting to see what it outputs.

Check section 8.3 LEDs in below manual for info on diagnostic board LEDs.

https://amigaone.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/x1000_trm.pdf

@geennaam

Quote:

I've seen similar before. I think it's just a bit sloppy and is a write error that doesn't appear in a nice error window. At this point I usually check the disc and change my drive as I find one I have always seems to have problems. Even when using AmiDVD to image it and just read from it.

@rjd324

Quote:

I can only think it would be needed on an XE so that full DMA modes can be used. Otherwise it's not needed for operation. No reason MakeCD or AmiDVD needs one as it should be fine on in built controller.

@Gebrochen

Quote:

Yes only single core. For OS4. Not worth rallying the streets over that one.

The notebook will be quad core, but it's also targeted for Linux users. If any Linux users interested in PowerPC are left. So it will only be by association and a happy accident if OS4 works on it.

Quote:

Lol. Thanks for noticing. Yeah it is a bit expensive. Likely dual and quad is easier to source so a means to an end. But a T2080 intended for the laptop would have been better. Unfortunately the AmigaOS design [flaws] don't lend it too well to modern OS methods. Why do we still like it?

@Chris

Oops.

@Chris

I used XZ as I found an embedded XZ unpacker I could easily compile in. In fact I can compile it from OS4 even though the code is generic and produces an OF binary. But my boot loader handles all the unpacking. The user doesn't need to concern themselves with any format as it's all handled by the manager that compresses kernels. Though it does only accept raw, GZip and XZ. First two are used in X1000 kernels.

@Raziel

Given XZ provides superior compression is why I used it in my X1Boot loader. Which was easy enough since I can embed it in the code and not reply on anything external. It's even better for PPC code since it has a PPC filter to optimise PPC binary compression.

@daveyw

Quote:

That makes it more like a 5010.

It's unfortunate here that on features like multi core it's like dragging feet. It really comes down to AmigaOS having design flaws that prevent it from being upward compatible with multi cores. The decision by Carl to totally lock up all programs running when only one wants to protect data is now causing us grief. It's easy to look at this in hindsight but I wonder why a specific function wasn't implemented to lock local data? On top of this is allowing and encouraging programs to access system data. So for the past 10 to 15 years and even more there have been attempts at AmigaOS multicore. None are in the hands of the user. I would have expected threads to be implemented at least since it should be done in baby steps. But we still don't have threads yet.