SUMMARY: DE500 on AS2100 5/300, tru64 4.0F

From: Chris Los (clos_at_trentu.ca)
Date: 11/17/03

  • Next message: Jeffrey_Hummel_at_albemarle.com: "SUMMARY: DLT vs. SDLT and Ultrium"
    Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 14:57:16 -0500
    To: tru64-unix-managers@ornl.gov
    
    

    Thanks to everyone who replied so quickly. Here are the responses which basically sum it all up.

    From: "Dr Thomas.Blinn@HP.com" <tpb@doctor.zk3.dec.com>

    There is only one driver in V4.0F for that class of Ethernet chip, and
    you can tell it's being selected by the fact the device is reported as
    "tu1" (the driver is named "tu" and that's the second instance of the
    chip type that was found in the system).

    Further, you can tell that although the driver knows the chip can do
    "auto negotiation", it also knows that you used console commands to
    turn that off and explicitly select 100BaseTX full duplex through the
    twisted-pair port.

    If you have poor performance, it's probably due to a noisy network and
    lots of retransmissions. Review the "netstat" reference page as well as
    the network tuning information in the networking manuals that come with
    your release. I suspect that if you look at the counters associated with
    that port using "netstat" you'll see lots of errors, but that's just my
    wild a** guess.

    Tom

    From: "Cohen, Andy" <Andy.Cohen@cognex.com>

    Chris,

    When we've had this type of problem it's been a port/switch negotiation
    issue; i.e., the way the port and the nic are 'talking' is causing the
    problem. Have the network people check the port and make sure it's running
    at 100 FDX. We've even had them lock in the port speed instead of
    auto-negotiating.

    hth,
    Andy

    From: Martin Rønde Andersen <martin.roende@mail.dk>

    This is a very old saga.

    It has to do with the 21140 chip and certain switches, that are not
    understanding each other. I had the troubles when using these de500 with
    21140 chip in a ASE cluster. The fix back then was to switch the de500
    to a de500 with 21141 tulip chip. (this is the card without components
    mounted on the back of the print.)

    You might be lucky to get it to work on 100 implex. But I will not
    recommend it. Because the trouble you could have cost more than ordering
    som de600 cards ,

    Yes they work, I have de600 running at a customer site at 200 (fastFD)on
    4.0f PK7

    From: "Thomas, Douglas L." <dthomas@glgt.com>
    Chris,

    Your best bet is to NOT use auto, set 100/Full on the switch, SRM, and OS.
    I have notes for setting the SRM and the OS, my Network guy did the switch.

    On SRM Console:
    >>>set ewa0_mode <mode>
    <mode> = twisted-pair (10M, ½)
               full (10M, full)
               fast (100M, ½)
               Fastfd (100M, full)

    >From OS:
    hwmgr -get attr -cat network

    lan_config -i tu0 -s [10|100] -x [1|0]
    To persist, add to /etc/inet.local
    OR
    ifconfig tu0 down
    ifconfig tu0 speed <n>
    ifconfig tu0 up
    To persist, add to /etc/rc.config:
    IFCONFIG_0=speed <n>
    <n> = 10 (10M, ½)
            20 (10M, full)
            100 (100M, ½)
            200 (100M, full)

    Douglas L. Thomas

    Orginal question:

    Would like to know if its possible to expect "100/full duplex" performance from a DE500 on a AS2100 5/300 under tru64 4.0F PK7? I have the card curenntly installed, running and set to "FastFD" but performance is very poor. When the system boots I get the following message in /var/adm/messages:

    Nov 13 08:52:43 ted vmunix: tu1: DECchip 21140: Revision: 2.0
    Nov 13 08:52:43 ted vmunix: tu1: auto negotiation capable device
    Nov 13 08:52:43 ted vmunix: tu1 at pci0 slot 8
    Nov 13 08:52:43 ted vmunix: tu1: DEC TULIP (10/100) Ethernet Interface, hardware address: 00-00-F8-03-77-E5
    Nov 13 08:52:43 ted vmunix: tu1: auto negotiation off: selecting 100BaseTX (UTP) port: full duplex

    How do i ensure the right driver is being selected for this device when the system boots?


  • Next message: Jeffrey_Hummel_at_albemarle.com: "SUMMARY: DLT vs. SDLT and Ultrium"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: [PATCH] Request only really used I/O ports in w83627hf driver
      ... And you should not request I/O addresses into which chip does not respond. ... It was not parallel port, ... my demonstration clearly shows that sensors chip answers to C05 and C06 only, ... they are free for use by the driver. ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: Atomic Port I/O
      ... On a XP system with the W83627DHG (similar Super I/O ... chip), the "Intel82801GB/GR LPC Interface Controller ... for the "ECP Printer Port " device. ... GPIO driver be registered under the LPC Interface ...
      (microsoft.public.win32.programmer.kernel)
    • Re: motherboard question
      ... For the i82547EI gigabit chip, it's going to be the e1000 driver, of ... The Firewire port -- hmm. ... Sound chip? ... Nothing else on the motherboard seems in any way problematic. ...
      (comp.os.linux.hardware)
    • Re: delete printer
      ... I was unable to find the3 XP driver. ... problem by purchasing and installing the new HP Officejet 6310xi. ... my wireless network. ... how to delete the IP port, and was able to re-add the IP port. ...
      (microsoft.public.windowsxp.print_fax)
    • Re: Connecting my Vista laptop to the XP server so I can Print
      ... adding the printer as local first and re-mapping it as network printer should work. ... I have gone on to the Vista compatibility website which directed me to the ... HP website to download the updated driver, I installed the updated driver on ... Click on Create a New Port, the default in the drop down list is Local ...
      (microsoft.public.windows.vista.networking_sharing)