From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Fri, 05 Aug 2005 22:02:21 +0100 (BST) Received: from outmx026.isp.belgacom.be ([IPv6:::ffff:195.238.2.91]:5250 "EHLO outmx026.isp.belgacom.be") by linux-mips.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 5 Aug 2005 22:02:05 +0100 Received: from outmx026.isp.belgacom.be (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by outmx026.isp.belgacom.be (8.12.11/8.12.11/Skynet-OUT-2.22) with ESMTP id j75L5UYg018317 for ; Fri, 5 Aug 2005 23:05:30 +0200 (envelope-from ) Received: from ayanami.246tNt.com (82-135.245.81.adsl.skynet.be [81.245.135.82]) by outmx026.isp.belgacom.be (8.12.11/8.12.11/Skynet-OUT-2.22) with ESMTP id j75L5PCb018262; Fri, 5 Aug 2005 23:05:25 +0200 (envelope-from ) Received: from [10.0.0.245] (246tNt-laptop.lan.ayanami.246tNt.com [10.0.0.245]) by ayanami.246tNt.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0E941CAC1C; Fri, 5 Aug 2005 23:05:17 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <42F3D4B7.6040905@246tNt.com> Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2005 23:05:59 +0200 From: Sylvain Munaut User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050610) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ppopov@embeddedalley.com Cc: Michael Kelly , "'linux-mips@linux-mips.org'" Subject: Re: AMD Au1100 problems (USB & Ethernet) References: <42F3C05E.7060002@246tNt.com> <1123271252.19992.189.camel@localhost.localdomain> <6.2.0.14.2.20050805155414.044a0f00@mail.cogcomp.com> <1123272640.19992.199.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1123272640.19992.199.camel@localhost.localdomain> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.90.0.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 8700 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: tnt@246tNt.com Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips Pete Popov wrote: > On Fri, 2005-08-05 at 15:58 -0400, Michael Kelly wrote: > >>The error count is less than .15%, not 5%. This does not seem excessive. >>So, the question is what are these errors exactly. We have done internal >>testing, but there is no way to test with every cable and switch/hub >>combination. Yes, on that particular count because I mainly testing TX on that particular boot (so the RX are mainly small acks). But when testing heavy receive with big packets, it can climbs up. > Of course. I'm sure the CPU module itself is fine. I took a look at the > picture and it looks like the PHY is external so I'm guessing it's on > their custom PCB. > The PHY is on the CPU module itself, it's a BCM5221. >>If you could determine the actual errors (such as CRC, collision, etc) then we >>can try to determine where the errors are coming from. It may very well be >>HW, but it is a bit too early to make such a broad statement without more >>information. > > > Well, could be just a cable issue, hub, etc, but I'll put that in the HW > bucket as well :) The RX errors are reported as "rx miss" (RX_MISSED_FRAME set) which is described as "Internal FIFO overrun". Maybe those are just OK and it's just that it can't wistand full 100Mbps (the module is connected on a 10/100/1000 switch and the server is gigabit). The TX errors are time-out, how can I find more details about that ? Sylvain