From owner-freebsd-hardware Mon Apr 14 09:20:23 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA24421 for hardware-outgoing; Mon, 14 Apr 1997 09:20:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from elwood.pionet.net (ELWOOD.pionet.net [199.120.116.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA24337; Mon, 14 Apr 1997 09:19:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pm3_178.pionet.net by elwood.pionet.net (5.65v3.2/1.1.10.5/25Oct96-0835PM) id AA21538; Mon, 14 Apr 1997 11:22:47 -0500 Message-Id: <33524995.16AC@pionet.net> Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 11:13:25 -0400 From: Tyson Boellstorff X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (OS/2; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-install@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: ppp installation woes using internal modem. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Basically, I am trying to set up an install over a ppp connection using an Intel Thor (P5-166) motherboard. I have set the serial ports in CMOS to auto, and have my internal modem (USR Sportster Orion chipset) hard set to com 1, irq 4. When I have this configuration, I am unable to set up ppp on com 1. My first & only option is com 2. I set it up next for auto (PNP) configuration, with the same CMOS settings. This time I was able to see com 1, but now I am not so sure I'm getting the modem, or just talking to the onboard serial port. I type in term, but am unable to get a response from any AT commands I try to send to the modem. Am I still not seeing the modem? Anybody have a step by step that will help me out on this? (The install.txt file mentions that the terminal emulation is a very simple emulator, and I am at a loss for 1) finding out how to confirm that I am sending AT commands correctly 2) Knowing how to actually set this up. (I am assuming that things aren't organized so that negotiation just happens in the background) From owner-freebsd-hardware Mon Apr 14 09:50:44 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA26917 for hardware-outgoing; Mon, 14 Apr 1997 09:50:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from elwood.pionet.net (ELWOOD.pionet.net [199.120.116.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA26910; Mon, 14 Apr 1997 09:50:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pm3_178.pionet.net by elwood.pionet.net (5.65v3.2/1.1.10.5/25Oct96-0835PM) id AA22971; Mon, 14 Apr 1997 11:53:33 -0500 Message-Id: <335250CF.900@pionet.net> Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 11:44:15 -0400 From: Tyson Boellstorff X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (OS/2; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: install@freebsd.org, hardware@freebsd.org Subject: ppp installation using USR PNP internal modem Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Basically, I am trying to set up an install over a ppp connection using an Intel Thor (P5-166) motherboard. I have set the serial ports in CMOS to auto, and have my internal modem (USR Sportster Orion chipset) hard set to com 1, irq 4. When I have this configuration, I am unable to set up ppp on com 1. My first & only option is com 2. I set it up next for auto (PNP) configuration, with the same CMOS settings. This time I was able to see com 1, but now I am not so sure I'm getting the modem, or just talking to the onboard serial port. I type in term, but am unable to get a response from any AT commands I try to send to the modem. Am I still not seeing the modem? Anybody have a step by step that will help me out on this? (The install.txt file mentions that the terminal emulation is a very simple emulator, and I am at a loss for 1) finding out how to confirm that I am sending AT commands correctly 2) Knowing how to actually set this up. (I am assuming that things aren't organized so that negotiation just happens in the background) From owner-freebsd-hardware Tue Apr 15 16:54:39 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA21508 for hardware-outgoing; Tue, 15 Apr 1997 16:54:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tyger.inna.net (root@tyger.inna.net [206.151.66.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA21502 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 1997 16:54:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from caught.inna.net (caught.inna.net [206.151.66.7]) by tyger.inna.net (8.8.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA26552; Tue, 15 Apr 1997 19:54:33 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 19:52:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Arnold To: Doug Russell cc: Chuck Robey , Stephen Roome , Dave Alderman , hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Pentuim or Pentuim Pro ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Thu, 10 Apr 1997, Doug Russell wrote: > Does anyone know the real status of the whole Open APIC idea? Last I > heard Cyrix and AMD weren't even actively working on implementing it. Has > this changed? It would be really nice to know what was going on in the > whole scheme of things. Word from my AMD rep is there is a new chipset coming after the AMD640. Although I dont buy that series of parts from AMD I am on the list when they have eval boards available. Saying that, AMD doesn't even have AMD640 eval boards yet. AMD does plan to support OpenPIC. So does VIA the chipset maker that licensed the VP2 chipset to AMD ( ie : the AMD640 ). +-----------------------------------------------+ : Tom Arnold - No relation to Rosanne : : SysAdmin/Pres - TBI, Ltd ( inna.net ) : : The Middle Peninsula's Internet Connection : +-----------------------------------------------+ From owner-freebsd-hardware Tue Apr 15 20:20:42 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id UAA02470 for hardware-outgoing; Tue, 15 Apr 1997 20:20:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 586quick166.saturn-tech.com ([207.229.19.32]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA02441 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 1997 20:20:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (drussell@localhost) by 586quick166.saturn-tech.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP id VAA12542; Tue, 15 Apr 1997 21:19:20 -0600 (MDT) X-Authentication-Warning: 586quick166.saturn-tech.com: drussell owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 21:19:20 -0600 (MDT) From: Doug Russell To: Thomas Arnold cc: Chuck Robey , Stephen Roome , Dave Alderman , hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Pentuim or Pentuim Pro ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Tue, 15 Apr 1997, Thomas Arnold wrote: > On Thu, 10 Apr 1997, Doug Russell wrote: > > Word from my AMD rep is there is a new chipset coming after the AMD640. > Although I dont buy that series of parts from AMD I am on the list when > they have eval boards available. Saying that, AMD doesn't even have > AMD640 eval boards yet. AMD does plan to support OpenPIC. So does VIA > the chipset maker that licensed the VP2 chipset to AMD ( ie : the AMD640 It would sure be nice to have a multi-K6 machine. :) Oh... By the way. Has anyone done any benchmarks on the K6 chips under FreeBSD yet? If not, let me know what tests you all want done on one, because I'm going to be picking up my first K6 for evaluation tomorrow. It's only a K6-166 chip, and I'll be running it in an ASUS HX board, but it should be some kind of indicator as to what the things can do. Later...... From owner-freebsd-hardware Tue Apr 15 20:47:43 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id UAA03788 for hardware-outgoing; Tue, 15 Apr 1997 20:47:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tyger.inna.net (root@tyger.inna.net [206.151.66.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA03782 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 1997 20:47:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from caught.inna.net (caught.inna.net [206.151.66.7]) by tyger.inna.net (8.8.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id XAA21520; Tue, 15 Apr 1997 23:48:07 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 23:46:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Arnold To: Doug Russell cc: Chuck Robey , Stephen Roome , Dave Alderman , hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Pentuim or Pentuim Pro ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Tue, 15 Apr 1997, Doug Russell wrote: > > Oh... By the way. Has anyone done any benchmarks on the K6 chips under > FreeBSD yet? If not, let me know what tests you all want done on one, > because I'm going to be picking up my first K6 for evaluation tomorrow. > It's only a K6-166 chip, and I'll be running it in an ASUS HX board, but > it should be some kind of indicator as to what the things can do. Gee. Ask and ye shall receive! ( Did these last night about 5 minutes after swapping my K5-133 for a K6-166 ). Chip : AMD K6-166 Motherboard : Machspeed VX based. 512k Cache. Award BIOS flashed to support K6-166 FreeBSD : v2.2GAMMA Set for 66mhz and 2.5x multiplier Sieve of Eratosthenes (Scaled to 10 Iterations) Version 1.2b, 26 Sep 1992 Array Size Number Last Prime Linear RunTime MIPS (Bytes) of Primes Time(sec) (Sec) 8191 1899 16381 0.007 0.007 225.2 10000 2261 19997 0.009 0.009 225.8 20000 4202 39989 0.018 0.018 227.3 40000 7836 79999 0.036 0.068 122.9 80000 14683 160001 0.072 0.244 69.0 160000 27607 319993 0.144 0.537 63.5 320000 52073 639997 0.288 1.288 53.5 640000 98609 1279997 0.575 3.371 41.3 1280000 187133 2559989 1.151 9.341 30.1 2560000 356243 5119997 2.301 21.310 26.6 Relative to 10 Iterations and the 8191 Array Size: Average RunTime = 0.029 (sec) High MIPS = 227.3 Low MIPS = 26.6 FLOPS C Program (Double Precision), V2.0 18 Dec 1992 Module Error RunTime MFLOPS (usec) 1 -4.6896e-13 0.4936 28.3621 2 2.2160e-13 0.3550 19.7199 3 -6.9944e-15 0.3188 53.3219 4 -9.7256e-14 0.2887 51.9496 5 -1.6542e-14 0.6858 42.2846 6 4.3632e-14 0.4933 58.7919 7 -4.9454e-11 0.8783 13.6629 8 7.2164e-14 0.5234 57.3160 Iterations = 32000000 NullTime (usec) = 0.0120 MFLOPS(1) = 24.8368 MFLOPS(2) = 26.2366 MFLOPS(3) = 39.6526 MFLOPS(4) = 56.0262 I am curious what causes nsieve to be so inconsistent across its spectrum. This is the same behavior the Cyrix 6x86's show. If you look at Tom Balfe's message from a couple days ago you'll see what the K5's I run do on these boards. The K5's seems to be VERY consistent. Although the K6 is a screamin machine, the benchmarks bother me. I talked to Machspeed today and am going to try some motherboard tweaking, but I'd really have to know more of what would affect nsieve like that. +-----------------------------------------------+ : Tom Arnold - No relation to Rosanne : : SysAdmin/Pres - TBI, Ltd ( inna.net ) : : The Middle Peninsula's Internet Connection : +-----------------------------------------------+ From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Apr 16 00:30:05 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id AAA22346 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 00:30:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay.krasnet.ru (relay.krasnet.ru [193.125.44.80]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA22278; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 00:29:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from post.krasnet.ru (post.krasnet.ru [193.125.44.81]) by relay.krasnet.ru (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA01178; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 15:32:01 +0800 (KRD) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by post.krasnet.ru (8.7.6/8.7.3) id PAA08189; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 15:28:48 +0800 (KRD) Received: by tpo.krasnoyarsk.su (dMail for DOS v1.23, 15Jun94); Wed, 16 Apr 1997 14:56:13 +0400 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Message-Id: Organization: The Territorial Centre for Interurban Communication N 17 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 14:56:13 +0400 (MSD) From: "Oleg M. Golovanov" X-Mailer: dMail [Demos Mail for DOS v1.23] Subject: Driver for 3Com900 TPO Etherlink PCI Lines: 16 Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Hello ! I have 3Com 900 TPO Etherlink PCI network adapter on my server with FreeBSD. Where and how can I obtain driver for it ? Please, answer me directly. -- Oleg M. Golovanov System administrator of Interurban Communications Center's Computer Network in Krasnoyarsk Region Phones (3912) 499-622, 435-920 Faxes (3912) 430-570, (095) 241-9142 From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Apr 16 00:35:34 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id AAA22912 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 00:35:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cpd.landau.ac.ru (cpd.landau.ac.ru [193.233.9.7]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id AAA22855 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 00:35:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from itp.ac.ru (itp.ac.ru [193.233.32.4]) by cpd.landau.ac.ru (8.6.11/8.6.5) with ESMTP id KAA19092 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:44:21 +0400 Received: from speecart.chg.ru (speecart.chg.ru [193.233.46.2]) by itp.ac.ru (8.8.3/8.8.3) with SMTP id LAA17683 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 11:00:05 +0400 (MSD) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.0 [p0] on FreeBSD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:43:20 +0400 (MSD) Organization: Landau Institute for Theoretical Physics From: "Sergey S. Kosyakov" To: freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: AMD K5-PR166 Sender: owner-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On 09-Apr-97 Thomas J Balfe wrote: >Here are some benchmarks I did. > > - Asus P55T2P4 Rev 3.10 with 512K L2 Cache > - 64MB memory > - AMD K5-PR166 > > FLOPS C Program (Double Precision), V2.0 18 Dec 1992 > > Module Error RunTime MFLOPS > (usec) > 1 4.9738e-14 1.1869 11.7951 > 2 1.3189e-13 0.8395 8.3383 > 3 1.9096e-14 0.6987 24.3306 > 4 -6.6613e-15 0.6642 22.5831 > 5 -1.6653e-14 1.8675 15.5292 > 6 3.3584e-14 1.2271 23.6326 > 7 5.2523e-11 2.3781 5.0460 > 8 -4.5519e-14 1.2884 23.2853 > > Iterations = 16000000 > NullTime (usec) = 0.0121 > MFLOPS(1) = 10.6205 > MFLOPS(2) = 10.0284 > MFLOPS(3) = 15.6805 > MFLOPS(4) = 23.4633 > On my Pentium-120 with 256K cache FLOPS C Program (Double Precision), V2.0 18 Dec 1992 Module Error RunTime MFLOPS (usec) 1 -4.6896e-13 0.7703 18.1738 2 2.2160e-13 0.5604 12.4905 3 -6.9944e-15 0.6108 27.8331 4 -9.7256e-14 0.5681 26.4030 5 -1.6542e-14 1.2712 22.8128 6 4.3632e-14 1.0201 28.4293 7 -4.9454e-11 1.1636 10.3125 8 7.2164e-14 1.0287 29.1623 Iterations = 32000000 NullTime (usec) = 0.0168 MFLOPS(1) = 15.2362 MFLOPS(2) = 17.0881 MFLOPS(3) = 22.6959 MFLOPS(4) = 28.1934 ---------------------------------- Sergey Kosyakov Landau Institute for Theoretical Physics E-Mail: Sergey S. Kosyakov Date: 16-Apr-97 Time: 10:43:20 ---------------------------------- From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Apr 16 00:48:27 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id AAA24721 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 00:48:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.serv.net (mx.serv.net [199.201.191.10]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA24702 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 00:48:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MindBender.serv.net by mx.serv.net (8.7.5/SERV Revision: 2.30) id AAA08992; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 00:47:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.HeadCandy.com (michaelv@localhost.HeadCandy.com [127.0.0.1]) by MindBender.serv.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA04872; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 00:47:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199704160747.AAA04872@MindBender.serv.net> X-Authentication-Warning: MindBender.serv.net: Host michaelv@localhost.HeadCandy.com [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol To: Thomas Arnold cc: Doug Russell , Chuck Robey , Stephen Roome , Dave Alderman , hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Pentuim or Pentuim Pro ? In-reply-to: Your message of Tue, 15 Apr 97 23:46:25 -0400. Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 00:47:38 -0700 From: "Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com" Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >On Tue, 15 Apr 1997, Doug Russell wrote: >> Oh... By the way. Has anyone done any benchmarks on the K6 chips under >> FreeBSD yet? If not, let me know what tests you all want done on one, [...] >Gee. Ask and ye shall receive! [K6-166 only stats deleted] That's nice, but can you post a competative comparison against something else? The stats do nothing for me all by themselves. Thanks. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Michael L. VanLoon michaelv@MindBender.serv.net --< Free your mind and your machine -- NetBSD free un*x >-- NetBSD working ports: 386+PC, Mac 68k, Amiga, Atari 68k, HP300, Sun3, Sun4/4c/4m, DEC MIPS, DEC Alpha, PC532, VAX, MVME68k, arm32... NetBSD ports in progress: PICA, others... ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Apr 16 01:19:06 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id BAA29061 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 01:19:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cpd.landau.ac.ru (cpd.landau.ac.ru [193.233.9.7]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id BAA28890 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 01:18:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from itp.ac.ru (itp.ac.ru [193.233.32.4]) by cpd.landau.ac.ru (8.6.11/8.6.5) with ESMTP id MAA19597 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 12:12:31 +0400 Received: from speecart.chg.ru (speecart.chg.ru [193.233.46.2]) by itp.ac.ru (8.8.3/8.8.3) with SMTP id MAA18115 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 12:28:02 +0400 (MSD) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.0 [p0] on FreeBSD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 11:55:51 +0400 (MSD) Organization: Landau Institute for Theoretical Physics From: "Sergey S. Kosyakov" To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: SMP question. Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk I have Neptune dual-Pentium motheboard. Currently the one P-90 installed. FreeBSD-2.2. If I install the second P-90 does performance grow ? Best regards, Sergey Kosyakov Landau Institute for Theoretical Physics E-Mail: Sergey S. Kosyakov Date: 16-Apr-97 Time: 11:55:51 ---------------------------------- From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Apr 16 02:05:46 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id CAA06345 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 02:05:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wolfenet.com (news1.wolfe.net [204.157.98.9]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id CAA06334 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 02:05:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from red2 (sea-ts7-p34.wolfenet.com [204.157.101.160]) by wolfenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id CAA16012; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 02:03:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <335495AD.1C01F62A@wolfenet.com> Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 02:02:37 -0700 From: Aron Roberts X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.0b3 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com" CC: Thomas Arnold , Doug Russell , Chuck Robey , Stephen Roome , Dave Alderman , hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Pentuim or Pentuim Pro ? X-Priority: 3 (Normal) References: <199704160747.AAA04872@MindBender.serv.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk If I find the time I'll be benching an AMD K6/200 vs. an Intel P5/200-MMX.. I'd like to also throw in a PPRO but I want to do nothing other than swap the chips... More than likely I'll bench under NetBSD 1.2.1 but if I find the time I might do FreeBSD 2.2.1 as well. Let me know what benchmarks you want to see.. I'll probably get around to it sometime next week. preliminary reports from popping the K6 into my NT box is that it is "da sh*t". I'll grab an OpenGL board and pound on it with softimage in the mean time. aron Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com wrote: > > >On Tue, 15 Apr 1997, Doug Russell wrote: > >> Oh... By the way. Has anyone done any benchmarks on the K6 chips under > >> FreeBSD yet? If not, let me know what tests you all want done on one, > [...] > > >Gee. Ask and ye shall receive! > [K6-166 only stats deleted] > > That's nice, but can you post a competative comparison against > something else? The stats do nothing for me all by themselves. > Thanks. > > From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Apr 16 06:21:06 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id GAA26291 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 06:21:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from who.cdrom.com (who.cdrom.com [204.216.27.3]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id GAA26284 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 06:21:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mirage.nlink.com.br (mirage.nlink.com.br [200.238.120.3]) by who.cdrom.com (8.8.5/8.6.11) with ESMTP id GAA05067 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 06:20:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from luiz@localhost) by mirage.nlink.com.br (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA28173; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:18:14 -0300 (EST) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:18:14 -0300 (EST) From: Luiz de Barros To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: talk to I/O Devices. Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Dear FreeBSD Experts, I would like to know how i can talk to an input/output device attached to some I/O ports in C. I want something equivalent to outportb and inportb from DOS. The board we want to develop is a remote power controller to reset our computers in case of a crash. The board will be controlled by I/O ports. Thanks in Advance, Luiz Nlink ISP. From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Apr 16 07:40:12 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id HAA00448 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 07:40:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bacall.lodgenet.com (bacall.lodgenet.com [205.138.147.242]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id HAA00434 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 07:40:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from mail@localhost) by bacall.lodgenet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id JAA16010; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 09:39:05 -0500 Received: from garbo.lodgenet.com(204.124.123.250) by bacall via smap (V1.3) id sma016008; Wed Apr 16 09:39:02 1997 Received: from jake.lodgenet.com ([10.0.11.30]) by garbo.lodgenet.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with ESMTP id JAA09290; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 09:38:47 -0500 Received: from jake.lodgenet.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jake.lodgenet.com (8.8.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA00602; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 09:39:03 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199704161439.JAA00602@jake.lodgenet.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0gamma 1/27/96 To: Luiz de Barros cc: freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: talk to I/O Devices. In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:18:14 -0300." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 09:39:03 -0500 From: "Eric L. Hernes" Sender: owner-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Luiz de Barros writes: >Dear FreeBSD Experts, > >I would like to know how i can talk to an input/output device attached to >some I/O ports in C. I want something equivalent to outportb and inportb >from DOS. The board we want to develop is a remote power controller to >reset our computers in case of a crash. The board will be controlled by >I/O ports. #include #include int main(int ac, char **av) { int fd; if((fd=open("/dev/io", O_RDWR))<0){ perror("/dev/io"); return 1; } outb(addr, val); inb(addr); outsw(addr, string); ... return 0; } should do it. > >Thanks in Advance, > >Luiz >Nlink ISP. > eric. -- erich@rrnet.com http://rrnet.com/~erich erich@freebsd.org http://www.freebsd.org/~erich erich@lodgenet.com From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Apr 16 07:54:19 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id HAA01159 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 07:54:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hydrogen.nike.efn.org (resnet.uoregon.edu [128.223.170.28]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA01152 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 07:54:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from jmg@localhost) by hydrogen.nike.efn.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id HAA28430; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 07:53:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <19970416075337.16693@hydrogen.nike.efn.org> Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 07:53:37 -0700 From: John-Mark Gurney To: Luiz de Barros Cc: freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: talk to I/O Devices. References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.69 In-Reply-To: ; from Luiz de Barros on Wed, Apr 16, 1997 at 10:18:14AM -0300 Reply-To: John-Mark Gurney Organization: Cu Networking X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 2.2-960801-SNAP i386 X-PGP-Fingerprint: B7 EC EF F8 AE ED A7 31 96 7A 22 B3 D8 56 36 F4 X-Files: The truth is out there X-URL: http://resnet.uoregon.edu/~gurney_j/ Sender: owner-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Luiz de Barros scribbled this message on Apr 16: > Dear FreeBSD Experts, > > I would like to know how i can talk to an input/output device attached to > some I/O ports in C. I want something equivalent to outportb and inportb > from DOS. The board we want to develop is a remote power controller to > reset our computers in case of a crash. The board will be controlled by > I/O ports. this is relativily easy... all you need to do is open the /dev/io file... this will give you access to the io ports... then you use the out[wb] and in[wb] macros/functions in machine/cpufunc.h to perform the operations.. something like this works: #include #include #include #include void main() { int i; if(open("/dev/io", O_RDWR, 0) == -1) err(1, "open of /dev/io failed"); outb(0x3c8, 0); outb(0x3c9, 0); outb(0x3c9, 0); outb(0x3c9, 0); } hope this helps... ttyl... -- John-Mark Cu Networking Modem/FAX: +1 541 683 6954 Live in Peace, destroy Micro$oft, support free software, run FreeBSD From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Apr 16 08:14:53 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA02281 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 08:14:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from itu.cc.jyu.fi (root@itu.cc.jyu.fi [130.234.40.21]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA02257; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 08:14:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by itu.cc.jyu.fi (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id SAA18367; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 18:14:37 +0300 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 18:14:36 +0300 (EET DST) From: Seppo Kallio To: hardware@freebsd.org, hackers@freebsd.org cc: Seppo Kallio Subject: Repeated UNIT ATTENTION, what is it, is this serious? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk I have a Pentium P90 Intel Zappa, FreeBSD 2.1.5 NFS server. It has one AHA 2940 + 3 Seagate disks (2+4+4G) and one AHA 2940 + HP Tape robot I am getting more and more this kind of error messages. First suspected the HP dat tape causing them. (That is why I have it in it's own AHA2940). The errors seem to happen regularly but not in peak hours, the usual clock times are about 02 04 05 08 14 16 17 19 20 21 22 23. It fits somehow to the tape activity but not 100%. I am taking backups at night time from 00:00 to 09:00. Is this a sign of some hardware problem? SCSI cable, terminator, some disk having malfunction? Or is this the aic7xxx driver problem I have heard? uname -a FreeBSD motti.cc.jyu.fi 2.1.5-RELEASE FreeBSD 2.1.5-RELEASE #0: Wed Jul 17 03:09:31 1996 jkh@whisker.cdrom.com:/usr/src/sys/compile/GENERIC i386 Apr 13 21:15:10 motti /kernel: sd2(ahc0:4:0): timed out in dataout phase, SCSISIGI == 0x4 Apr 13 21:15:10 motti /kernel: ahc0: Issued Channel A Bus Reset #2. 3 SCBs aborted Apr 13 21:15:10 motti /kernel: sd1(ahc0:2:0): UNIT ATTENTION asc:29,0 Apr 13 21:15:10 motti /kernel: sd1(ahc0:2:0): Power on, reset, or bus device reset occurred field replaceable unit: 1 Apr 13 21:15:10 motti /kernel: , retries:3 Apr 13 21:15:10 motti /kernel: sd2(ahc0:4:0): UNIT ATTENTION asc:29,0 Apr 13 21:15:10 motti /kernel: sd2(ahc0:4:0): Power on, reset, or bus device reset occurred field replaceable unit: 1 Apr 13 21:15:10 motti /kernel: , retries:3 Apr 13 21:15:10 motti /kernel: sd0(ahc0:0:0): UNIT ATTENTION asc:29,0 Apr 13 21:15:10 motti /kernel: sd0(ahc0:0:0): Power on, reset, or bus device reset occurred field replaceable unit: 1 Apr 13 21:15:10 motti /kernel: , retries:4 Seppo Kallio kallio@cc.jyu.fi Computing Center 553606 (sisäinen), 050 5524968 (suora ulkoa) U of Jyväskylä 62.14N 25.44E Fax +358-14-603611 PL 35, 40351 Jyväskylä, Finland http://www.jyu.fi/~kallio From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Apr 16 09:51:14 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA07295 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 09:51:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lariat.lariat.org ([129.72.251.2]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA07287 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 09:51:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from solo.lariat.org ([129.72.251.10]) by lariat.lariat.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id KAA02907; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:49:55 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970416104604.006b0dc4@lariat.org> X-Sender: brett@lariat.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:49:45 -0600 To: gurney_j@resnet.uoregon.edu, luiz@nlink.com.br From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: talk to I/O Devices. Cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk At 07:53 AM 4/16/97 -0600, jmg@hydrogen.nike.efn.org wrote: >this is relativily easy... all you need to do is open the /dev/io file... Fascinating. What does opening this "file" actually do? (I can't find it in the source.) --Brett From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Apr 16 10:02:56 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA08010 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:02:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Ilsa.StevesCafe.com (Ilsa.StevesCafe.com [205.168.119.129]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA08000 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:02:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Ilsa.StevesCafe.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by Ilsa.StevesCafe.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA17607; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:54:36 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <199704161654.KAA17607@Ilsa.StevesCafe.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0gamma 1/27/96 From: Steve Passe To: "Sergey S. Kosyakov" cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SMP question. In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 16 Apr 1997 11:55:51 +0400." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:54:36 -0600 Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Hi, > > I have Neptune dual-Pentium motheboard. Currently the one P-90 installed. > FreeBSD-2.2. > If I install the second P-90 does performance grow ? some things yes, some things no... in general its a win. there is some possibility that the P-90 (I assumme you mean P5-90) will be a problem. That vintage of P5 is from the days when the APIC section was somewhat unstable, and often required a "matched pair" of CPUs, ie 2 from the same stepping and rev level. -- Steve Passe | powered by smp@csn.net | Symmetric MultiProcessor FreeBSD From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Apr 16 10:41:25 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA15165 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:41:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gdi.uoregon.edu (gdi.uoregon.edu [128.223.170.30]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA15138; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:41:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (dwhite@localhost) by gdi.uoregon.edu (8.8.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA00628; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:40:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:40:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug White X-Sender: dwhite@localhost Reply-To: Doug White To: "Oleg M. Golovanov" cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Driver for 3Com900 TPO Etherlink PCI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Wed, 16 Apr 1997, Oleg M. Golovanov wrote: > I have 3Com 900 TPO Etherlink PCI network adapter on my server with FreeBSD. > > Where and how can I obtain driver for it ? It's supported in 2.1.7 and later releases under the vx driver. Doug White | University of Oregon Internet: dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu | Residence Networking Assistant http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~dwhite | Computer Science Major From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Apr 16 10:49:38 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA17490 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:49:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.serv.net (mx.serv.net [199.201.191.10]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA17469 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:49:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MindBender.serv.net by mx.serv.net (8.7.5/SERV Revision: 2.30) id KAA25245; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:49:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.HeadCandy.com (michaelv@localhost.HeadCandy.com [127.0.0.1]) by MindBender.serv.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA07608; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:49:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199704161749.KAA07608@MindBender.serv.net> X-Authentication-Warning: MindBender.serv.net: Host michaelv@localhost.HeadCandy.com [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol To: Aron Roberts cc: Thomas Arnold , Doug Russell , Chuck Robey , Stephen Roome , Dave Alderman , hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Pentuim or Pentuim Pro ? In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 16 Apr 97 02:02:37 -0700. <335495AD.1C01F62A@wolfenet.com> Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:49:05 -0700 From: "Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com" Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >If I find the time I'll be benching an AMD K6/200 vs. an Intel >P5/200-MMX.. I'd like to also throw in a PPRO but I want to do nothing >other than swap the chips... > >More than likely I'll bench under NetBSD 1.2.1 but if I find the time I >might do FreeBSD 2.2.1 as well. I don't know what benchmark you're using, but if you send it to me I can benchmark it on my Pentium Pro 200MHz (actually overclocked to 233, so that might be cheating :-), running NetBSD 1.2. I also have a Cyrix 6x86 P166+, and can use a Pentium 133. All are running NetBSD 1.2. >Let me know what benchmarks you want to see.. I'll probably get around >to it sometime next week. I'm not picky -- I just don't have the one you're running. :-) The ones I've run in the past are pretty simple. I wouldn't mind seeing some more complex benchmarks. Suggestions from anyone? >preliminary reports from popping the K6 into my NT box is that it is >"da sh*t". I'll grab an OpenGL board and pound on it with softimage in >the mean time. Yeah, I've had the same thing to say about my Pentium Pro ever since I got it. For about a month, I would just mutter "Damn this thing is fast" every time I did something intense on it (I run NT on it most of the time). It plays a hellish game of Descent, too. :-) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Michael L. VanLoon michaelv@MindBender.serv.net --< Free your mind and your machine -- NetBSD free un*x >-- NetBSD working ports: 386+PC, Mac 68k, Amiga, Atari 68k, HP300, Sun3, Sun4/4c/4m, DEC MIPS, DEC Alpha, PC532, VAX, MVME68k, arm32... NetBSD ports in progress: PICA, others... ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Apr 16 10:52:32 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA18381 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:52:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hda.hda.com (hda-bicnet.bicnet.net [207.198.1.121]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA18233; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:52:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from dufault@localhost) by hda.hda.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA13803; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 13:39:31 -0400 (EDT) From: Peter Dufault Message-Id: <199704161739.NAA13803@hda.hda.com> Subject: Re: Repeated UNIT ATTENTION, what is it, is this serious? In-Reply-To: from Seppo Kallio at "Apr 16, 97 06:14:36 pm" To: kallio@cc.jyu.fi (Seppo Kallio) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 13:39:31 -0400 (EDT) Cc: hardware@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, kallio@cc.jyu.fi X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL25 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > Is this a sign of some hardware problem? SCSI cable, terminator, some disk > having malfunction? Or is this the aic7xxx driver problem I have heard? The unit attention errors are the drives informing you about the bus having been reset. That is a symptom and not a problem; the bus reset was done by the ahc driver after getting that time out. I can't answer as to WHY it timed out. Peter -- Peter Dufault (dufault@hda.com) Realtime Machine Control and Simulation HD Associates, Inc. Voice: 508 433 6936 From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Apr 16 12:20:11 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id MAA12384 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 12:20:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wolfe.net (mail1.wolfe.net [204.157.98.11]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id MAA12198 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 12:19:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gonzo.wolfenet.com (gonzo.wolfenet.com [204.157.98.2]) by wolfe.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id MAA02564; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 12:22:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (aroberts@localhost) by gonzo.wolfenet.com (8.8.3/8.7) with SMTP id MAA06050; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 12:19:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: gonzo.wolfenet.com: aroberts owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 12:19:34 -0700 (PDT) From: "Aron T. Roberts" Reply-To: Aron Roberts To: "Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com" cc: Thomas Arnold , Doug Russell , Chuck Robey , Stephen Roome , Dave Alderman , hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Pentuim or Pentuim Pro ? In-Reply-To: <199704161749.KAA07608@MindBender.serv.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Wed, 16 Apr 1997, Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com wrote: > > I don't know what benchmark you're using, but if you send it to me I > can benchmark it on my Pentium Pro 200MHz (actually overclocked to > 233, so that might be cheating :-), running NetBSD 1.2. I also have a > Cyrix 6x86 P166+, and can use a Pentium 133. All are running NetBSD > 1.2. actaully I am not "using" any benchmark at the moment.. I have a pile of parts and hopefully a spare few hours to do this. I'm asking folks to let me know what benchmarks people want to see.. If there is no interest I'll probably just run the usual stuff for my own benefit. However if some folks are evaluating a purchase and have some specific benchmarks they want to see.. send 'em my way... no promises but I'll do my best. aron From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Apr 16 13:11:28 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA24366 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 13:11:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from silver.sms.fi (silver.sms.fi [194.111.122.17]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA23627; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 13:10:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from pete@localhost) by silver.sms.fi (8.8.5/8.7.3) id XAA00994; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 23:08:53 +0300 (EEST) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 23:08:53 +0300 (EEST) Message-Id: <199704162008.XAA00994@silver.sms.fi> From: Petri Helenius To: Seppo Kallio Cc: hardware@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Repeated UNIT ATTENTION, what is it, is this serious? In-Reply-To: References: Sender: owner-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Seppo Kallio writes: > > I have a Pentium P90 Intel Zappa, FreeBSD 2.1.5 NFS server. It has one AHA > 2940 + 3 Seagate disks (2+4+4G) and one AHA 2940 + HP Tape robot > > I am getting more and more this kind of error messages. First suspected > the HP dat tape causing them. (That is why I have it in it's own AHA2940). > We used to have this symptom appear every now and then until we decided that five disks don't live too well in a single bus (at least it did not work for us). Not wanting to troubleshoot further we divided the bus into two (replaced the 2940 with 3940) and all errors went away. Highly likely the problem was related to termination, though... Pete From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Apr 16 13:15:43 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA24835 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 13:15:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from jmb@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA24668; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 13:13:22 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jonathan M. Bresler" Message-Id: <199704162013.NAA24668@freefall.freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Pentuim or Pentuim Pro ? To: aroberts@wolfenet.com (Aron Roberts) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 13:13:21 -0700 (PDT) Cc: michaelv@MindBender.serv.net, tom@inna.net, drussell@saturn-tech.com, chuckr@glue.umd.edu, steve@visint.co.uk, dave@persprog.com, hardware@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <335495AD.1C01F62A@wolfenet.com> from "Aron Roberts" at Apr 16, 97 02:02:37 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Aron Roberts wrote: > > If I find the time I'll be benching an AMD K6/200 vs. an Intel > P5/200-MMX.. I'd like to also throw in a PPRO but I want to do nothing > other than swap the chips... > > More than likely I'll bench under NetBSD 1.2.1 but if I find the time I > might do FreeBSD 2.2.1 as well. > > Let me know what benchmarks you want to see.. I'll probably get around http://www.scl.ameslab.gov/scl/HINT/HINT.html From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Apr 16 13:37:06 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA28678 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 13:37:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay-11.mail.demon.net (relay-11.mail.demon.net [194.217.242.137]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id NAA28670 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 13:37:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from longacre.demon.co.uk ([158.152.156.24]) by relay-10.mail.demon.net id aa1012117; 16 Apr 97 20:45 BST From: Michael Searle Message-ID: To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SMP question. References: <199704161654.KAA17607@Ilsa.StevesCafe.com> Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 20:14:07 BST X-Mailer: Offlite 0.09 / Termite Internet for Acorn RISC OS Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Steve Passe wrote: > Hi, >> I have Neptune dual-Pentium motheboard. Currently the one P-90 >> installed. FreeBSD-2.2. If I install the second P-90 does performance >> grow ? > some things yes, some things no... in general its a win. > there is some possibility that the P-90 (I assumme you mean P5-90) will > be a problem. That vintage of P5 is from the days when the APIC section > was somewhat unstable, and often required a "matched pair" of CPUs, ie 2 > from the same stepping and rev level. Is this ever necessary for a 2 or 4 P6-150? -- Michael Searle - csubl@csv.warwick.ac.uk From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Apr 16 14:08:52 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id OAA07535 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 14:08:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lariat.lariat.org ([129.72.251.2]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA07438; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 14:08:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from solo.lariat.org ([129.72.251.10]) by lariat.lariat.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id PAA05793; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 15:07:49 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970416150727.006ccadc@lariat.org> X-Sender: brett@lariat.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 15:07:36 -0600 To: pete@sms.fi, kallio@cc.jyu.fi From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Repeated UNIT ATTENTION, what is it, is this serious? Cc: hardware@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk In SCSI-speak, a "unit attention" condition means that a device was reset, was powered up, or had a serious error. The host is notified of the condition not when it occurs but only when it tries to send a command to the device -- which might be quite some time later. The command is rejected, but usually succeeds when it's retried. This is a hack that was added to SCSI because there was no easy way for a peripheral to notify the host right away when an error occurred. The problem could be anything from a parity error to overlapping SCSI IDs to bad termination to soft errors on the disk or tape. --Brett From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Apr 16 15:10:34 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA18336 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 15:10:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Ilsa.StevesCafe.com (Ilsa.StevesCafe.com [205.168.119.129]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA18091; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 15:07:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Ilsa.StevesCafe.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by Ilsa.StevesCafe.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA18500; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 16:07:29 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <199704162207.QAA18500@Ilsa.StevesCafe.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0gamma 1/27/96 From: Steve Passe To: Michael Searle cc: freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG, smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: SMP question. In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 16 Apr 1997 20:14:07 -0000." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 16:07:28 -0600 Sender: owner-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Hi, > ... > > there is some possibility that the P-90 (I assumme you mean P5-90) will > > be a problem. That vintage of P5 is from the days when the APIC section > > was somewhat unstable, and often required a "matched pair" of CPUs, ie 2 > > from the same stepping and rev level. > > Is this ever necessary for a 2 or 4 P6-150? it is generally believed that this is NOT a problem with any of the P6 chips, but I can't guarantee it. you might also consider trying to clock the P5-150s at 166mHz, the bus will then run @ 66mHz instead of 60mHz. I just purchased a dual P6 with 2 P6-166mHzx512k cache and am successfully running them at 200mHz. -- Steve Passe | powered by smp@csn.net | Symmetric MultiProcessor FreeBSD From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Apr 16 19:14:16 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id TAA29899 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 19:14:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (wck-ca6-19.ix.netcom.com [199.35.213.211]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA29881 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 19:14:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (8.8.5/8.6.9) id TAA19390; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 19:13:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 19:13:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199704170213.TAA19390@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> To: atr@pobox.com CC: michaelv@MindBender.serv.net, tom@inna.net, drussell@saturn-tech.com, chuckr@glue.umd.edu, steve@visint.co.uk, dave@persprog.com, hardware@freebsd.org In-reply-to: (aroberts@WOLFENET.com) Subject: Re: Pentuim or Pentuim Pro ? From: asami@vader.cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk * I'm asking folks to let me know what benchmarks people want to see.. If * there is no interest I'll probably just run the usual stuff for my own * benefit. However if some folks are evaluating a purchase and have some * specific benchmarks they want to see.. send 'em my way... no promises but * I'll do my best. I want to see this: dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/null bs=1m count=200 :) Results so far: P5-133 115MB/s (non-parity EDO, with P5-optimized copyin/out) P6-200 89MB/s (non-parity EDO) P6-200 87MB/s (with ECC, non-EDO) P6-233 89MB/s (with ECC, non-EDO) All with 60ns memory. P5-133 is Triton I (430FX), P6 are Natomas (440FX). Satoshi From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Apr 16 22:50:12 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id WAA10262 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 22:50:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cpd.landau.ac.ru (cpd.landau.ac.ru [193.233.9.7]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id WAA10139 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 22:48:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from itp.ac.ru (itp.ac.ru [193.233.32.4]) by cpd.landau.ac.ru (8.6.11/8.6.5) with ESMTP id JAA23767 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:42:48 +0400 Received: from speecart.chg.ru (speecart.chg.ru [193.233.46.2]) by itp.ac.ru (8.8.3/8.8.3) with SMTP id JAA21811; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:55:35 +0400 (MSD) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.0 [p0] on FreeBSD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <199704161654.KAA17607@Ilsa.StevesCafe.com> Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:37:06 +0400 (MSD) Organization: Landau Institute for Theoretical Physics From: "Sergey S. Kosyakov" To: Steve Passe Subject: Re: SMP question. Cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On 16-Apr-97 Steve Passe wrote: >Hi, > >> >> I have Neptune dual-Pentium motheboard. Currently the one P-90 installed. >> FreeBSD-2.2. >> If I install the second P-90 does performance grow ? > >some things yes, some things no... in general its a win. > > Dear Steve, how FreeBSD supports SMP ? Is it internal kernel support ? Or should I install some additional software to support SMP on user applications level ? I can't find any informaton about SMP in FAQs and others docs. Regards, ---------------------------------- Sergey Kosyakov Landau Institute for Theoretical Physics E-Mail: Sergey S. Kosyakov Date: 17-Apr-97 Time: 09:37:07 ---------------------------------- From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Apr 16 23:53:25 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id XAA13680 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 23:53:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from minor.stranger.com (stranger.vip.best.com [204.156.129.250]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id XAA13675 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 23:53:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dog.farm.org (dog.farm.org [207.111.140.47]) by minor.stranger.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id AAA20957; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 00:07:07 -0700 Received: (from dk@localhost) by dog.farm.org (8.7.5/dk#3) id XAA10996; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 23:54:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 23:54:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Dmitry Kohmanyuk Message-Id: <199704170654.XAA10996@dog.farm.org> To: brett@lariat.org (Brett Glass) Cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: talk to I/O Devices. Newsgroups: cs-monolit.gated.lists.freebsd.hardware Organization: FARM Computing Association Reply-To: dk+@ua.net X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2] Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk In article <3.0.32.19970416104604.006b0dc4@lariat.org> you wrote: > At 07:53 AM 4/16/97 -0600, jmg@hydrogen.nike.efn.org wrote: > > >this is relativily easy... all you need to do is open the /dev/io file... > Fascinating. What does opening this "file" actually do? (I can't find it > in the source.) look at /sys/i386/i386/mem.c:mmopen() and others in that file. From owner-freebsd-hardware Thu Apr 17 01:56:25 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id BAA20557 for hardware-outgoing; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 01:56:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mccomm.nl (root@gateppp.mccomm.nl [193.67.87.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id BAA20551 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 01:56:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hpserver.mccomm.nl (hpserver.mccomm.nl [193.67.87.13]) by mccomm.nl (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA10442 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 10:56:10 +0200 Message-Id: <199704170856.KAA10442@mccomm.nl> Received: by hpserver.mccomm.nl (1.38.193.5/16.2) id AA19245; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 10:55:57 +0200 From: Rob Schofield Subject: Re: Repeated UNIT ATTENTION, what is it, is this serious? To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org (Hardware list at FreeBSD) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 97 10:55:57 METDST In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970416150727.006ccadc@lariat.org>; from "Brett Glass" at Apr 16, 97 3:07 pm Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85.2.1] Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > The problem could be anything from a parity error to overlapping SCSI IDs > to bad termination to soft errors on the disk or tape. - or that old chestnut, a power supply that can't deal with the peak and static current requirements of so many disks/tape drives/etc. in one box. There was speak of sperating the number of drives onto two buses giving success, but no-one remarked that this could have been successful as a result of having to move the devices into a seperate box, new power supply, etc. and thereby reducing power load on the original PSU. There is also the question of power being supplied to the termination of the last device on the chain; if the end termination is being affected by a sickly power supply, then commands on the bus issued by the host at the far end could be getting "lost" or garbled when a target device cannot evaluate the voltage levels presented at it's bus connection, then either do not respond or go to UA condition as a result of what it thinks is an "illegal command" being presented. There are many reasons, unfortunately - but I would look at the power supply as it (and the drives it is powering) get nice and hot after a few hours of work, then measure the term power supply voltage on the terminator device. What does surprise me here is that from comments made, no attempt is being made by the FreeBSD driver to follow a "Soft/Hard" reset policy on miscreant devices, i.e. first issue a RESET *message* to the device and doing a command retry, then as a last resort a bus reset. Have I correctly interpreted comments here? A bus reset, whilst not that harmful, is pretty drastic action to correct the behaviour of just one (readily identifiable) device at UA! This is like tear-gassing a school bus full of kids as punishment just 'cos one peed in his pants in desperation... Rob Schofield -- Witticisms are hard to define on Monday mornings... schofiel@xs4all.nl http://www.xs4all.nl/~schofiel rschof@mccomm.nl From owner-freebsd-hardware Thu Apr 17 03:17:06 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id DAA23665 for hardware-outgoing; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 03:17:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shadows.aeon.net (bsdhw@shadows.aeon.net [194.100.41.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA23653 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 03:16:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from bsdhw@localhost) by shadows.aeon.net (8.8.5/8.8.3) id NAA29735 for hardware@freebsd.org; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 13:17:39 +0300 (EET DST) From: mika ruohotie Message-Id: <199704171017.NAA29735@shadows.aeon.net> Subject: Re: Pentuim or Pentuim Pro ? In-Reply-To: <199704161749.KAA07608@MindBender.serv.net> from "Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com" at "Apr 16, 97 10:49:05 am" To: hardware@freebsd.org Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 13:17:39 +0300 (EET DST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL31 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > >If I find the time I'll be benching an AMD K6/200 vs. an Intel > >P5/200-MMX.. I'd like to also throw in a PPRO but I want to do nothing can you do 'make world' with the same hw+/usr/src and under same kernel? also making a log and diffing it to see it didnt change would be nice. mickey From owner-freebsd-hardware Thu Apr 17 07:39:19 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id HAA04743 for hardware-outgoing; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 07:39:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rocky.mt.sri.com (rocky.mt.sri.com [206.127.76.100]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA04737 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 07:39:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from nate@localhost) by rocky.mt.sri.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id IAA12807; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 08:38:48 -0600 (MDT) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 08:38:48 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <199704171438.IAA12807@rocky.mt.sri.com> From: Nate Williams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: asami@vader.cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) Cc: atr@pobox.com, michaelv@mindbender.serv.net, tom@inna.net, drussell@saturn-tech.com, chuckr@glue.umd.edu, steve@visint.co.uk, dave@persprog.com, hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Pentuim or Pentuim Pro ? In-Reply-To: <199704170213.TAA19390@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> References: <199704170213.TAA19390@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> X-Mailer: VM 6.26 under 19.15 XEmacs Lucid Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > I want to see this: > > dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/null bs=1m count=200 > > :) > > Results so far: > > P5-133 115MB/s (non-parity EDO, with P5-optimized copyin/out) > P6-200 89MB/s (non-parity EDO) > P6-200 87MB/s (with ECC, non-EDO) > P6-233 89MB/s (with ECC, non-EDO) P5-166 (non-partiy, non-EDO, with P5 optimzied copyin/out standard in 2.2.1) 209715200 bytes transferred in 1.747394 secs (120015980 bytes/sec) Triton I board, probably the same as Satoshis. I may be able to get some P6 numbers, but the boxes are both running NT now. :( Nate From owner-freebsd-hardware Thu Apr 17 08:35:26 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA12384 for hardware-outgoing; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 08:35:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lariat.lariat.org ([129.72.251.2]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA12372 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 08:35:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from solo.lariat.org ([129.72.251.10]) by lariat.lariat.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA15839; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:33:59 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19970417092103.0070f97c@lariat.org> X-Sender: brett@lariat.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:21:03 -0600 To: dk+@ua.net From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: talk to I/O Devices. Cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199704170654.XAA10996@dog.farm.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk At 11:54 PM 4/16/97 -0700, Dmitry Kohmanyuk wrote: >> Fascinating. What does opening this "file" actually do? (I can't find it >> in the source.) > >look at /sys/i386/i386/mem.c:mmopen() and others in that file. Just looked at it, and it appears that this file opens the I/O space as a random-access device. But accessing ports this way would slow code down so dramatically that it could be useless for many control applications! Also, the sample code in previous messages in this thread seems to indicate that one can read and write directly. How is this done? --Brett From owner-freebsd-hardware Thu Apr 17 09:00:42 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA15913 for hardware-outgoing; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:00:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tyger.inna.net (root@tyger.inna.net [206.151.66.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA15907 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:00:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from caught.inna.net (caught.inna.net [206.151.66.7]) by tyger.inna.net (8.8.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA23259; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 12:00:51 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 11:59:04 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Arnold To: "Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com" cc: Doug Russell , Chuck Robey , Stephen Roome , Dave Alderman , hardware@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Pentuim or Pentuim Pro ? In-Reply-To: <199704160747.AAA04872@MindBender.serv.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hardware@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > That's nice, but can you post a competative comparison against > something else? The stats do nothing for me all by themselves. > Thanks. Chips I have on hand : K5-133, K6-166, Cyrix 6x86-166. I will re-bench all of them on the same board. If you have benchmarks other then Nsieve and FLOPS you'd like to see run I'll run them too. I expect to be able to do this tonight. +-----------------------------------------------+ : Tom Arnold - No relation to Rosanne : : SysAdmin/Pres - TBI, Ltd ( inna.net ) : : The Middle Peninsula's Internet Connection : +-----------------------------------------------+ From owner-freebsd-hardware Thu Apr 17 09:19:52 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA18191 for hardware-outgoing; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:19:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kremvax.demos.su (kremvax.demos.su [194.87.0.20]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA18175 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:19:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by kremvax.demos.su (8.6.13/D) from 0@sinbin.demos.su [194.87.0.31] with ESMTP id UAA18547; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 20:16:13 +0400 Received: by sinbin.demos.su id UAA06496; (8.6.12/D) Thu, 17 Apr 1997 20:14:45 +0400 From: bag@sinbin.demos.su (Alex G. Bulushev) Message-Id: <199704171614.UAA06496@sinbin.demos.su> Subject: Re: Pentuim or Pentuim Pro ? To: tom@inna.net (Thomas Arnold) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 20:14:45 +0400 (MSD) Cc: michaelv@mindbender.serv.net, drussell@saturn-tech.com, chuckr@glue.umd.edu, steve@visint.co.uk, dave@persprog.com, hardware@FreeBSD.org In-Reply-To: from "Thomas Arnold" at Apr 17, 97 11:59:04 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME7a] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-hardware@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > > That's nice, but can you post a competative comparison against > > something else? The stats do nothing for me all by themselves. > > Thanks. > > Chips I have on hand : K5-133, K6-166, Cyrix 6x86-166. I will re-bench > all of them on the same board. > > If you have benchmarks other then Nsieve and FLOPS you'd like to see run > I'll run them too. I expect to be able to do this tonight. it is also interesting to run bytebench (we have a colection of bytebench results for different platforms and cpu's) Alex. > > +-----------------------------------------------+ > : Tom Arnold - No relation to Rosanne : > : SysAdmin/Pres - TBI, Ltd ( inna.net ) : > : The Middle Peninsula's Internet Connection : > +-----------------------------------------------+ > > From owner-freebsd-hardware Thu Apr 17 09:31:56 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA19002 for hardware-outgoing; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:31:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA18997 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:31:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from time.cdrom.com (localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.5/8.6.9) with ESMTP id JAA06486; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:30:20 -0700 (PDT) To: Brett Glass cc: dk+@ua.net, freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: talk to I/O Devices. In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:21:03 MDT." <3.0.1.32.19970417092103.0070f97c@lariat.org> Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:30:19 -0700 Message-ID: <6484.861294619@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-hardware@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > control applications! Also, the sample code in previous messages in > this thread seems to indicate that one can read and write directly. That's correct. Opening /dev/io simply grants you the permissions, it in no way acts as an "I/O gate" or otherwise gets involved in any part of the transaction after it's opened. It's just a permissions hack and nothing more. Jordan From owner-freebsd-hardware Thu Apr 17 10:45:48 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA24223 for hardware-outgoing; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 10:45:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from jmb@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA24209; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 10:45:38 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jonathan M. Bresler" Message-Id: <199704171745.KAA24209@freefall.freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Repeated UNIT ATTENTION, what is it, is this serious? To: rschof@mccomm.nl (Rob Schofield) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 10:45:37 -0700 (PDT) Cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199704170856.KAA10442@mccomm.nl> from "Rob Schofield" at Apr 17, 97 10:55:57 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Rob Schofield wrote: > > > The problem could be anything from a parity error to overlapping SCSI IDs > > to bad termination to soft errors on the disk or tape. > > - or that old chestnut, a power supply that can't deal with the peak > and static current requirements of so many disks/tape drives/etc. in > one box. There was speak of sperating the number of drives onto two scsi bus length? how long was the chain including inside the cabinets, etc. jmb From owner-freebsd-hardware Thu Apr 17 13:10:25 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA01445 for hardware-outgoing; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 13:10:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alpo.whistle.com (alpo.whistle.com [207.76.204.38]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA01434 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 13:10:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from current1.whistle.com (current1.whistle.com [207.76.205.22]) by alpo.whistle.com (8.8.5/8.8.4) with SMTP id NAA27657; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 13:05:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <33568294.2781E494@whistle.com> Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 13:05:40 -0700 From: Julian Elischer Organization: Whistle Communications X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (X11; I; FreeBSD 2.2-CURRENT i386) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brett Glass CC: dk+@ua.net, freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: talk to I/O Devices. References: <3.0.1.32.19970417092103.0070f97c@lariat.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hardware@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Brett Glass wrote: > > At 11:54 PM 4/16/97 -0700, Dmitry Kohmanyuk wrote: > > >> Fascinating. What does opening this "file" actually do? (I can't find it > >> in the source.) > > > >look at /sys/i386/i386/mem.c:mmopen() and others in that file. > > Just looked at it, and it appears that this file opens the I/O space > as a random-access device. But accessing ports this way would slow > code down so dramatically that it could be useless for many > control applications! Also, the sample code in previous messages in > this thread seems to indicate that one can read and write directly. > How is this done? > > --Brett no, openning /dev/io doesn't do anything except set a bit on your process descriptor that allows your process to do IO instructions directly.. otherwise inb() and outb() are priveleged instructions and will cause an access fault. From owner-freebsd-hardware Thu Apr 17 13:28:05 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA02742 for hardware-outgoing; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 13:28:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from biggusdiskus.flyingfox.com (biggusdiskus.flyingfox.com [206.14.52.27]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA02735 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 13:28:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from jas@localhost) by biggusdiskus.flyingfox.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA16969 for hardware@freebsd.org; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 13:27:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 13:27:25 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Shankland Message-Id: <199704172027.NAA16969@biggusdiskus.flyingfox.com> To: hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Znyx 10/100 cards and the de driver Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk I just picked up a bunch of Znyx ZX345 10/100 cards (that's the single, not the quad card), under the mistaken impression that these now work with FreeBSD. They don't, with 2.2-970417-RELENG, in 10 Mbit mode. (Haven't tried 'em at 100 Mb/s yet.) The card gets recognized, but fails without error messages if I don't use special ifconfig options, and "transmission timeout" messages if I force the driver into 10Bt mode with "-link2". My questions are: * Sh*t! I could have sworn these worked with the newer de driver. (OK, that's not a question.) * Do they work in -current? * If so, how hard would it be to backport the changes to 2.2? * What about the 4-NI card (the ZX346)? (The de driver has some tulip_21140_znyx_zx34x_... data structures, and I have a funny feeling that tweaking those data structures in the right way might accomplish the necessary magic.) I am willing to contribute some time, money, or hardware to get this working. Jim Shankland Flying Fox Computer Systems, Inc. From owner-freebsd-hardware Thu Apr 17 19:29:42 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id TAA25623 for hardware-outgoing; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 19:29:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au (genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au [129.127.96.120]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA25618 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 19:29:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from msmith@localhost) by genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au (8.8.5/8.7.3) id LAA20954; Fri, 18 Apr 1997 11:58:37 +0930 (CST) From: Michael Smith Message-Id: <199704180228.LAA20954@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> Subject: Re: talk to I/O Devices. In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970417092103.0070f97c@lariat.org> from Brett Glass at "Apr 17, 97 09:21:03 am" To: brett@lariat.org (Brett Glass) Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 11:58:37 +0930 (CST) Cc: dk+@ua.net, freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL28 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Brett Glass stands accused of saying: > At 11:54 PM 4/16/97 -0700, Dmitry Kohmanyuk wrote: > > >> Fascinating. What does opening this "file" actually do? (I can't find it > >> in the source.) > > > >look at /sys/i386/i386/mem.c:mmopen() and others in that file. > > Just looked at it, and it appears that this file opens the I/O space > as a random-access device. But accessing ports this way would slow > code down so dramatically that it could be useless for many > control applications! Also, the sample code in previous messages in > this thread seems to indicate that one can read and write directly. > How is this done? It doesn't. The suggestion was to look at mmopen, not the other functions. opening /dev/mem sets the IOPL bit in a process' flags, which allows it to perform I/O instructions without taking a fault. Until very recently, there was no means for any restriction to be placed on this, access was all-or-nothing. Jonathan Lemon and Peter Wemm have been working on some changes which will allow a process to be granted restricted I/O access. > --Brett -- ]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@gsoft.com.au [[ ]] Genesis Software genesis@gsoft.com.au [[ ]] High-speed data acquisition and (GSM mobile) 0411-222-496 [[ ]] realtime instrument control. (ph) +61-8-8267-3493 [[ ]] Unix hardware collector. "Where are your PEZ?" The Tick [[