Subject: Re: would my Quad card be broken ?
To: None <joel@carnat.net>
From: Michael <macallan18@earthlink.net>
List: port-sparc64
Date: 06/19/2005 12:43:24
--Signature_Sun__19_Jun_2005_12_43_24_-0400_SckI=WvKxGjJsTtn
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello,
> > I meant in something that's not a Sun - if there's a generic problem
> > with the Simba PCI bridge and more bridges behind it then other U5
> > or U10 boxes will most likely have it too.
> >=20
>=20
> well, I have a (bad) clue for this ;(
> this card was previsously pluggued into a pentium/celeron box (see a
> previous thread I wrote on how to have this card working on i386).
Ah, I remember - didn't really read it though ( I don't have an x86 box
anymore ) and I wasn't aware that it's the same card.=20
> to summarize :
> 1. it works on i386 when all the drivers are enabled.
> 2. it has the 200K/s issue (but I thought it might be a i386 issue so
> didn't investigate more).
> 3. looks like it "works/bugs" the same way on 3.0_BETA/sparc64 and
> 2.0_STABLE/i386.
So it's either the driver or the card itself. Any chance to test it with
Solaris? ( booting the CD and dropping into a shell should be enough I
think )
have fun
Michael
--Signature_Sun__19_Jun_2005_12_43_24_-0400_SckI=WvKxGjJsTtn
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (NetBSD)
iQEVAwUBQrWgrMpnzkX8Yg2nAQKVpggAuUwBxwnaijd8FM//hOV6CfRpBwcUvXxC
9Zp007rDBFcPGE+kz25Ncu/8c4AueXGnw0nCp1zYuL9Prth70Yz9yM5dCWQXe61f
9l/GCTuV0mkqFgtueGmtUTnsqKsFvBiNe82Buk1qLLALk7Xearm/4LCwfhk8EXtH
W/xW3EEC/NWp0oZtYPI4ju5gNJhXxbT7H4zhm2JMntj2AasdSQQzNnPkS9EFpOd7
hN/3TsyVcWbm6X7TSiZgiKq5OArcoBADoHqt1QdKrpZrVnF9gqxAo73szISwL2SJ
hZ2p35uGtx1C3hin29TVynxne4jMCif4E/FSWTXQFITrFPdxsPenqA==
=UsGh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--Signature_Sun__19_Jun_2005_12_43_24_-0400_SckI=WvKxGjJsTtn--