From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from oss.sgi.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g67JFSRw032648 for ; Sun, 7 Jul 2002 12:15:28 -0700 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.5/8.12.3/Submit) id g67JFSn2032647 for linux-mips-outgoing; Sun, 7 Jul 2002 12:15:28 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: oss.sgi.com: majordomo set sender to owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com using -f Received: from dea.linux-mips.net (free197-x30.dialo.tiscali.de [62.246.30.197] (may be forged)) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with SMTP id g67JFLRw032638 for ; Sun, 7 Jul 2002 12:15:23 -0700 Received: (from ralf@localhost) by dea.linux-mips.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g67JJU632345; Sun, 7 Jul 2002 21:19:30 +0200 Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2002 21:19:30 +0200 From: Ralf Baechle To: Muthukumar Ratty Cc: linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: MIPS Atlas board Message-ID: <20020707211930.A26692@dea.linux-mips.net> References: <20020703235506.A21798@dea.linux-mips.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: ; from muthu5@sbcglobal.net on Sun, Jul 07, 2002 at 11:09:00AM -0700 X-Accept-Language: de,en,fr X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.1 required=5.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,MAY_BE_FORGED version=2.20 X-Spam-Level: Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk On Sun, Jul 07, 2002 at 11:09:00AM -0700, Muthukumar Ratty wrote: > > Anybody actually still using the MIPS Atlas board? If so, what kernel > > versions? I've not had any feedback about the Atlas in many moons, so > > I'm considering to drop support for it for 2.5. Comment? > > Oh no, I am using Atlas board with 2.4 kernel and I know few others also > using it (guess they dont care anymore :( . If its not a time killer > could you please add it to 2.5 also. Ok. Consider my posting simply a poll, nothing more. > BTW I was running network performance tools and the max I could read from > Atlas board is ~0.3M. Is this a problem with the hardware? Hard to say without any kind of closer analysis. The number certainly seems to be too low. What network benchmark did you run, what processor and clock rate does your Atlas have? Ralf