From owner-freebsd-alpha Fri Jul 28 17:27:25 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-alpha@freebsd.org Received: from duke.cs.duke.edu (duke.cs.duke.edu [152.3.140.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B338C37BB28 for ; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 17:27:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gallatin@cs.duke.edu) Received: from grasshopper.cs.duke.edu (grasshopper.cs.duke.edu [152.3.145.30]) by duke.cs.duke.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA25263; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 20:27:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from gallatin@localhost) by grasshopper.cs.duke.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) id UAA73539; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 20:27:21 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from gallatin@cs.duke.edu) From: Andrew Gallatin MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 20:27:21 -0400 (EDT) To: mjacob@feral.com Cc: "'FreeBSD Alpha mailing list'" Subject: Re: fxp0 hangs my AXPpci33 In-Reply-To: References: <20000728224517.A38620@cicely8.cicely.de> X-Mailer: VM 6.43 under 20.4 "Emerald" XEmacs Lucid Message-ID: <14722.9217.916477.612350@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> Sender: owner-freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Matthew Jacob writes: > > Well, I dunno, then. > > Can somebody try (I can't get to the lab today) an I/O mapped fxp > on an LCA chipset, but with the DELAY(10) instead of DELAY(1) > as dg suggested? The thing is, these APECs and LCA based machines are really old & slow. People have reported success with faster machines (like my UP1000 and somebody else's PC164). So how could it be that the slower machines could have a problem where increasing the delay would help...? It would be interesting to hear the results of a test though. It would be much easier to slap some DELAY()'s in.. ;-) Drew To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message