With the latest CLRMAME Pro version 3.0.2, I get a large number of SHA1 errors. If I re-run the scan, it reports different ROMS with the error in different sets (not consistently the same ROMS).

I did not have the problem with v3.00.

Is this a known issue?

Thank you for the hard work on the tool! It is very much appreciated.

> With the latest CLRMAME Pro version 3.0.2, I get a large number of SHA1 errors.
> If I re-run the scan, it reports different ROMS with the error in different sets
> (not consistently the same ROMS).
>
> I did not have the problem with v3.00.
>
> Is this a known issue?
>


Hmm...normally random checksum errors are caused by hardware issues like:
1) bad ide cables
2) bad RAM or wrong RAM timing (esp. on overclocked systems)
3) older buggy VIA chipsets

On the other side some checksum routines have changed in 3.02 but noone had any problems yet. Can you repeat the problem with a minimum number of sets...or a special setup which I can test?

What I don't like is the fact that you say they appear randomly. If it's a bug they should appear with the same sets each time because the scan process is the same. Random effects sound like the just mentioned RAM/IDE/CHIPSET problems. The 3.02 checks use some more memcmp() functions...and are generally faster than 3.00.

If you believe it or not...ClrMamePro is rather hardware intense...a lot of memory and hd operations are done.
So..what does that mean for you...well...check your hardware ;) I had users who had a brand new PC but the IDE cable was bad. Another had his AMD CPU at 75°C causing checksum bugs. Another had an old VIA chipset motherboard and got random checksum bugs.

I don't say it's not a bug...but as long as I can't repeat it, I can't fix it. The random character of the effect sounds like a hardware problem to me.

I did several sha1 scans...no problems...

I will recheck that.

well...the checksum changes were mainly: stringcompare functions were replaced with faster memcmp functions...Nothing really big has changed.

Roman Scherzer
ClrMamePro

> > With the latest CLRMAME Pro version 3.0.2, I get a large number of SHA1
> errors.
> > If I re-run the scan, it reports different ROMS with the error in different
> sets
> > (not consistently the same ROMS).
> >
> > I did not have the problem with v3.00.
> >
> > Is this a known issue?
> >
>
>
> Hmm...normally random checksum errors are caused by hardware issues like:
> 1) bad ide cables
> 2) bad RAM or wrong RAM timing (esp. on overclocked systems)
> 3) older buggy VIA chipsets
>
> On the other side some checksum routines have changed in 3.02 but noone had any
> problems yet. Can you repeat the problem with a minimum number of sets...or a
> special setup which I can test?
>
> What I don't like is the fact that you say they appear randomly. If it's a bug
> they should appear with the same sets each time because the scan process is the
> same. Random effects sound like the just mentioned RAM/IDE/CHIPSET problems. The
> 3.02 checks use some more memcmp() functions...and are generally faster than
> 3.00.
>
> If you believe it or not...ClrMamePro is rather hardware intense...a lot of
> memory and hd operations are done.
> So..what does that mean for you...well...check your hardware ;) I had users who
> had a brand new PC but the IDE cable was bad. Another had his AMD CPU at 75°C
> causing checksum bugs. Another had an old VIA chipset motherboard and got random
> checksum bugs.
>
> I don't say it's not a bug...but as long as I can't repeat it, I can't fix it.
> The random character of the effect sounds like a hardware problem to me.
>
> I did several sha1 scans...no problems...
>
> I will recheck that.
>
> well...the checksum changes were mainly: stringcompare functions were replaced
> with faster memcmp functions...Nothing really big has changed.
>
> Roman Scherzer
> ClrMamePro

No SHA1 errors here. After a couple of scans. ClrMame 3.02 and MAME 0.70.

Nothing odd has happened to my computer, HD, etc. I guess I could do a defrag on my drive, but otherwise my machine seems to be working at 100%. I've never had these errors before.

Hmmmm...

> I've never
> had these errors before.

Hehe...I heard that before ;)
"My PC is brand new ...I can't have any problems"
"All my highend 3d games work perfect. No crashes at all"

These persons found out that the ide cable was bad..or they used old chipset drivers which caused random ClrMamePro checksum errors.

I don't say you have that problem...but ClrMamePro is a lot more resource intense (a lot of memory/IDE operations) than common applications or games. And the checksum checks became faster from 3.00 to 3.02, so you do even more checks at the same time now.

I asked several people to do sha1 scans...no one reported any problems.

Well...we do some further tests...as soon as we can repeat it in any way I will recheck the routines.

What you can do is:
- try a different system
- update your chipsetdrivers (esp. when you use a VIA chipset)
- try a different HD (on a different IDE controller / with a different cable)

Maybe you should post one of these errors in detail here.
I will recheck the routines tomorrow.

Roman Scherzer
ClrMamePro

don't get me wrong...but the random character or appearing/disappearing checksum errors is suspicious.

Roman Scherzer
ClrMamePro

I had bumped the CPU multiplier on my SOYO motherboard and AMD 1.4GHz processor (to get 1.5GHz) and I guess this was causing the problems. I dropped the multiplier and no more errors.

I thought I had turned that off because I had seen a few issues with some other programs, but I guess I had not done it. I guess enough changed with the latest CLRMame pro for this issue to manifest due to my machines timing.

Thanks for the suggestions. That was the first thing I checked.

Great program Roman! Thanks for all the work!

Matt

> don't get me wrong...but the random character or appearing/disappearing checksum
> errors is suspicious.
>
> Roman Scherzer
> ClrMamePro
>

Thanks for letting me know!

Roman Scherzer
ClrMamePro

> With the latest CLRMAME Pro version 3.0.2, I get a large number of SHA1 errors.
> If I re-run the scan, it reports different ROMS with the error in different sets
> (not consistently the same ROMS).
>
> I did not have the problem with v3.00.
>
> Is this a known issue?
>
> Thank you for the hard work on the tool! It is very much appreciated.
>