From owner-freebsd-alpha Wed Jul 26 13:26:25 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-alpha@freebsd.org Received: from feral.com (feral.com [192.67.166.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD65B37BF2A for ; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 13:26:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mjacob@feral.com) Received: from semuta.feral.com (semuta [192.67.166.70]) by feral.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA02214; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 13:26:06 -0700 Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 13:25:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Jacob Reply-To: mjacob@feral.com To: David Greenman Cc: Andrew Gallatin , "Koster, K.J." , "'FreeBSD Alpha mailing list'" Subject: Re: fxp0 hangs my AXPpci33 In-Reply-To: <200007262005.NAA02751@implode.root.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > >I think that the SEEPROM reading might be very timing > >dependant... David? I'm worried that whatever the path in the chipset > > It is timing dependant, but the driver inserts more than enough delay > by using DELAY(1) for 1us. I think the requirement is much much less than > that (< .5us), so if timing really is the problem, then it leads me to wonder > if DELAY() might be somewhat broken on Alpha for small delays. A quick way > to test for that would be to change the DELAY(1)'s to DELAY(10) or more. It shouldn't be. It's using the rpcc register to do more precise timing. It *used* to be about 30% off, but now should be quite accurate- but it's certainly possible. I'll be interested in hearing this. I forget- is this with 4.0 or with -current/4.1? I seem to recall that this source base is a recent source base change even for 4.1- (July 4th). -matt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message