From owner-freebsd-alpha Fri Jul 28 17:51:24 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 6C58B37BB28 for ; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 17:51:20 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mjacob@feral.com) Received: from beppo.feral.com (beppo [192.67.166.79]) by feral.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA11892; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 17:51:12 -0700 Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 17:51:15 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Jacob Reply-To: mjacob@feral.com To: Andrew Gallatin Cc: "'FreeBSD Alpha mailing list'" Subject: Re: fxp0 hangs my AXPpci33 In-Reply-To: <14722.9217.916477.612350@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> 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 > 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.. ;-) Yes, but if there's some subtle bug in DELAY, I want to fix that. Otherwise, all the LCA/APECS machines can go where Jason's old Pelican just went (the recycle bin). -matt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message