From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Aug 1 09:17:00 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA22935 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 09:17:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from axp5.physik.fu-berlin.de (axp5.fddi5B.fu-berlin.de [160.45.5.75]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id JAA22917 for ; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 09:16:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mordillo (graichen.dialup.fu-berlin.de [160.45.217.183]) by axp5.physik.fu-berlin.de (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id SAA16521; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 18:15:34 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from graichen@localhost) by mordillo (8.6.12/8.6.12) id SAA01210; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 18:15:21 +0200 From: Thomas Graichen Message-Id: <199608011615.SAA01210@mordillo> Subject: Re: tcp/ip over lp0 To: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 18:15:20 +0200 (MET DST) Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org In-Reply-To: <199607312120.PAA03869@rocky.mt.sri.com> from "Nate Williams" at Jul 31, 96 03:20:38 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk hasn't Nate Williams said ? ... > > > 4308 packets transmitted, 617 packets received, 85% packet loss > > That anything gets through implies that at least the software is setup > correctly, so the remaining factor is hardware. > > > time ago - but now some parts of them have changed - and the cable was > > different) ? - or can it be that the cable is too long (it's really long - > > about 5 meters or so) ? > > That's a *really* long cable. Also, *MAKE SURE* that neither machine > has another device using it's interrupt, and that there is a driver for > all hardware that generate interrupts. > > If you happen to use the commonly-used IRQ 7 for the parallel port and > something other than the parallel port either generates interrupts on 7 > or one another unregistered port you'll have lots of problems. > > Make sure both machines have don't have IRQ conflicts and shorten the > cable. > i tried another shorter cable and it's the same - so it must be the controller - can some bios settings or things like AUTO_EOI* or DUMMY_NOOPS have any influence ? - as far as i'm aware of all interrupts are correct set (ok i think nearly all are used - serial: 3,4,9(2), parallel: 7, ethernet: 5, sound: 11, ide controllers: 14,15 - should'nt i get something like stray interrups if something is wrong ? will this help you ? graichen@mordillo:~> vmstat -i interrupt total rate clk0 irq0 212749 99 rtc0 irq8 272238 127 fdc0 irq6 1 0 wdc0 irq14 20300 9 mcd0 irq10 1 0 vt0 irq1 9619 4 sio0 irq4 6251 2 sio3 irq9 53109 24 ed0 irq5 1 0 Total 574269 269 there's no irq 7 to see - but i haven't used it until the vmstat - does the lptcontrol -p/-i affect the lp0 device too or is it always using the interrupt version ? do you have any idea ? - i'll try to experiment further. thanks in advance - t -- thomas graichen graichen@mail.physik.fu-berlin.de graichen@FreeBSD.org perfection is reached, not when there is no longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away antoine de saint-exupery