From owner-freebsd-sparc64@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 18 19:45:32 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62EB81065679 for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:45:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from samankaya@netscape.net) Received: from imr-db02.mx.aol.com (imr-db02.mx.aol.com [205.188.91.96]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2416F8FC0C for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:45:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from imo-da03.mx.aol.com (imo-da03.mx.aol.com [205.188.169.201]) by imr-db02.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id o0IJjGLQ016246; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 14:45:16 -0500 Received: from samankaya@netscape.net by imo-da03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v42.5.) id 3.d02.6e081590 (43913); Mon, 18 Jan 2010 14:45:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from [172.16.1.52] (mail.reformkurumsal.com [212.156.209.87]) by cia-dc08.mx.aol.com (v127.7) with ESMTP id MAILCIADC082-ab894b54ba43174; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 14:45:09 -0500 Message-ID: <4B54BA43.5080604@netscape.net> Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 21:45:07 +0200 From: Kaya Saman User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090323) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Marius Strobl References: <4B549896.8090309@netscape.net> <20100118193222.GL18141@alchemy.franken.de> In-Reply-To: <20100118193222.GL18141@alchemy.franken.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AOL-IP: 212.156.209.87 X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) X-Spam-Flag: NO X-AOL-SENDER: samankaya@netscape.net Cc: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Sun Fire V480 compatibility question? X-BeenThere: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the Sparc List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:45:32 -0000 Many thanks for the response Marius! :-) I appreciate your help so much. > > It's the other way around, version 4 and 7 refer to the contents > of the "version#" property of these bridges in the Open Firmware > device tree, which can be translated into 2.x revision numbers for > exampled based on the table present in the Schizo Errata [1], i.e. > version 7 translates to revision 2.5 and version 4 translates to > revision 2.2. The sunsolve document you refer to actuall is in > line with this information. > Ok now I get it.... > I highly suspect this problem is related to the infamous BugID > 4898531, just that Solaris can work around it to some extent or > that FreeBSD happens to better a triggering it (I actually have > a version of cas(4) which makes it less likely but still doesn't > work around it completely), so V480 equipped with 501-6780 and > 501-6790 centerplanes should be fine while those with 501-5819 > and 501-6733 are prone to fail. > > Marius > > 1: http://www.sun.com/processors/manuals/External_Schizo_Errata.pdf > Just some more quick questions if you don't mind: Can I add extra NICs to the v480 that will work with BSD - provided I have a bridge that is supported? Last question is can I virtualize on this machine?? Obviously things like Xen, Vbox, VMware, Xvm are all built for x86 machines but I have heard about LDoms although I don't know if they will work with SPARC or the v480 and most importantly BSD. According to this: http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/hcl/data/v12n/views/v12n_ldoms.page1.html it only supports Linux and Solaris? Just that I am still stuck between deciding to use OpenSolaris on the machine or BSD as the real thing pulling me towards BSD is the software: Cacti and Munin mainly. Apart from that I am more familiar and happier using Solaris zones as I will create a primary/secondary combo. As we have been through this already in my last post which got many responses I don't want to dwell on this topic and will just have to play around I guess as to see which one suites my needs overall best. Regards, Kaya