Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 21:21:51 +0200 From: Bernd Walter <ticso@cicely12.cicely.de> To: Wilko Bulte <wb@freebie.xs4all.nl> Cc: freebsd-alpha@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 5.3-BETA1 for Alpha available Message-ID: <20040829192149.GB59909@cicely12.cicely.de> In-Reply-To: <20040829190120.GA45159@freebie.xs4all.nl> References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0408290044080.15329-100000@servww6.ww.uni-erlangen.de> <20040829095002.GA43484@freebie.xs4all.nl> <20040829131149.GA59909@cicely12.cicely.de> <20040829190120.GA45159@freebie.xs4all.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Aug 29, 2004 at 09:01:20PM +0200, Wilko Bulte wrote: > On Sun, Aug 29, 2004 at 03:11:50PM +0200, Bernd Walter wrote.. > > On Sun, Aug 29, 2004 at 11:50:02AM +0200, Wilko Bulte wrote: > > > On Sun, Aug 29, 2004 at 01:40:33AM +0200, Gheorghe Ardelean wrote.. > > ... > > > > > On AXPpci33 it dies while testing sym0. Before this sym0 reports: > > > > sym0: <810> port 0x10100-0x101ff mem 0x81854100-0x818541ff at device 6.0 on pci0 > > > > sym0: No NVRAM, ID 7, Fast-10, SE, parity checking > > > > CACHE TEST FAILED: timeout. > > > > sym0: CACHE INCORRECTLY CONFIGURED. > > > > > > > > fatal kernel trap: > > > > > > > > trap entry = 0x4 (unaligned access fault) > > > > cpuid = 0 > > > > faulting va = 0xdeadc0dedeadc0de > > > > Mmm - it's dereferencing nonsense. > > Guess this bug is old and just triggered as a result of the timeout. > > I'm missing an IRQ in the probe, so the timeout is reasonable. > > Normaly we should see: > > sym0: interrupting at ISA irq 11 > > A complete boot -v output would be interessting to see routing > > decisions - sounds much like someone broke IRQ routing on alpha. > > LCA based alphas are the only alphas so far that we have enabled > > interrupt routing and possibly the only alphas that share ISA and PCI > > interrupts. > > Ruslan just reported that BETA1 just installed fine on his NoName > (see his posting to alpha@). I saw - even Gheorghe reported his System to boot with -v. Seems like the IRQ line was intended to be printed after the panic. Would be nice to know how this could be reproduced. > > > Hmm.... Both PC64 and AXPpci33 are EV4x machines.. Hmm.. all my test > > > boxes are >= EV5 > > > > To be exact AXPpci33 is LCA with an 21066 CPU or LCA45 with an 21066A > > CPU, which is very similar to EV4 and EV45. > > Ruslan has a 166MHz, so an 21066 CPU. Unless he underclocked his System :) > > It seems that those boards are sold with 21066 CPUs only and that > > 21066A only made it into Alphabooks and maybe some Multias. > > Not true. I at some point had a 233MHz NoName. Don't know if it > was originally supplied with that CPU. I also had a 233MHz Multia > at some point. Whatever.. I know that the board works with an A type CPU and their higher clock rates, but 21066A CPUs are not mentioned in my Version of AXPpci33's "OEM Design Guide". What is mentioned in it is a 21068 66MHz CPU, which I don't know anything else about. -- B.Walter BWCT http://www.bwct.de bernd@bwct.de info@bwct.de
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040829192149.GB59909>