From owner-freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Wed Jul 8 02:12:36 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arm@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78B503535A6 for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 02:12:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gonzo@bluezbox.com) Received: from id.bluezbox.com (id.bluezbox.com [45.55.20.155]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B1jW71ldtz4MxF for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 02:12:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gonzo@bluezbox.com) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=id.bluezbox.com) by id.bluezbox.com with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1jszZT-000Kpd-7f; Tue, 07 Jul 2020 19:12:28 -0700 Received: (from gonzo@localhost) by id.bluezbox.com (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 0682CQ79080080; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 19:12:26 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gonzo@bluezbox.com) X-Authentication-Warning: id.bluezbox.com: gonzo set sender to gonzo@bluezbox.com using -f Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2020 19:12:26 -0700 From: Oleksandr Tymoshenko To: Mark Millard Cc: Peter Jeremy , freebsd-arm Subject: Re: freebsd-arm Digest, Vol 740, Issue 7 (Rock64 Ethernet testing) Message-ID: <20200708021226.GA77884@bluezbox.com> References: <1731fbded28.10a3342f0357159.8148813293316485882@fkardame.com> <20200706204707.GA94158@bluezbox.com> <0A2E974E-39D3-46C8-8791-3BD914EBE7E9@yahoo.com> <0C77695E-A9D0-410A-B105-5B69823E17E2@yahoo.com> <3289DA3D-03FB-43BD-9A6A-956AC0A03B59@yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3289DA3D-03FB-43BD-9A6A-956AC0A03B59@yahoo.com> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD/11.2-RELEASE-p10 (amd64) X-Spam-Level: -- X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "id.bluezbox.com", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see The administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Mark Millard (marklmi@yahoo.com) wrote: > Any chance that the delays (or other parameters) depend > on the operating temperature(s) of some parts? > > If yes, then some of the following about the Rock [...] Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4B1jW71ldtz4MxF X-Spamd-Bar: -- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of gonzo@bluezbox.com designates 45.55.20.155 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=gonzo@bluezbox.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.62 / 15.00]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.93)[-0.928]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.99)[-0.991]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; HAS_XAW(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[bluezbox.com]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.40)[-0.405]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[yahoo.com]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:14061, ipnet:45.55.0.0/19, country:US]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: "Porting FreeBSD to ARM processors." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2020 02:12:36 -0000 Mark Millard (marklmi@yahoo.com) wrote: > Any chance that the delays (or other parameters) depend > on the operating temperature(s) of some parts? > > If yes, then some of the following about the Rock64 V2 > context that I have access to might be relevant to > explaining my already reported V2 results (not much > for Retr): > > A) The Rock64 has a "case" that is really just a top > and a bottom with posts: open on all 4 sides. > > B) It has a fan blowing down on the board from the > top. > > C) It has a heat sink on the SOC, which the fan blows > on directly. > > D) It has a heat sink on the RAM, which the fan also > blows on directly. > > (I've not dealt with a more modern non-debug kernel > build yet. It still may be some time before I deal > with that.) Temperature is not likely to be a factor in the delay values. Rock64 V2 has a known issue with Gigabit ethernet stability: https://forum.pine64.org/showthread.php?tid=7545 https://sanisimov.com/2019/08/fixing-rock64-v2-gigabit-ethernet/ Althought judging by description it's more like an almost complete network lock-up and not performance degradation. I received another board with RK3328 today and will investigate the issue further. -- gonzo