Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 05:54:47 +0000 () From: Michael Smith <msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au> To: rich@spirit.com.au (Rich Siggs) Cc: hsu@clinet.fi, msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, freebsd-hackers@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: 16 ports Boca - anyone using it? Message-ID: <199511270554.FAA03687@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> In-Reply-To: <199511270541.QAA16483@pod.spirit.com.au> from "Rich Siggs" at Nov 27, 95 04:41:20 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Rich Siggs stands accused of saying: > > Usually the ports which fail have DCD set, I haven't verified it but they > > probably are as they are either leased lines, or in some cases modems which > > were connected when crash happens. > I've done testing of this port-no-probe behaviour on both my > AST/4 cards & the BOCA. Both of them have the _potential_ to fail a > port's probe if DCD is set, but not all DCD-active ports fail a > crash-reboot probe.. However, a port that has DCD _&_ either TX or > RX at the crash is bound to fail the probe (ain't 100%, but > certainly 75% probable ;) *Hmm* It's hard for a port to TX during probe 8) Can you enable the verbose probe error reporting (flags & 0x80) and let us know which test(s) fail? > Could this be related to the 16550A's, or (as suggested) some code in the > boot probe? It's possible that received data during a probe could cause the probe to fail. Some tests are done with loopback enabled, it's possible that a bad (or nonexistent) loopback implementation may also cause a probe to fail in strange circumstances. > Rich. More input! -- ]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ ]] Genesis Software genesis@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ ]] High-speed data acquisition and (GSM mobile) 041-122-496 [[ ]] realtime instrument control (ph/fax) +61-8-267-3039 [[ ]] "Who does BSD?" "We do Chucky, we do." [[
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199511270554.FAA03687>