X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Received: by onstor-exch02.onstor.net 
	id <01C87A8C.D4FC9A92@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 21:37:46 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: concrete info on CF status problem
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 21:37:46 -0700
Message-ID: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E089F19E7@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <20080228202749.036b8be7@ripper.onstor.net>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: concrete info on CF status problem
Thread-Index: Ach6i3ciZd5kwD+LR+yqvE9u0uTmzQAAQE4A
References: <20080225140859.55145d81@ripper.onstor.net><BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E089F185F@onstor-exch02.onstor.net><20080228162754.3c0479e9@ripper.onstor.net><BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E089F1902@onstor-exch02.onstor.net><20080228174605.206a0a38@ripper.onstor.net><BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E089F1971@onstor-exch02.onstor.net><20080228185120.016da30b@ripper.onstor.net><BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E089F19C5@onstor-exch02.onstor.net> <20080228202749.036b8be7@ripper.onstor.net>
From: "Brian Stark" <brian.stark@onstor.com>
To: "Andy Sharp" <andy.sharp@onstor.com>
Cc: "Warren Gale" <warren.gale@onstor.com>

As much as I'd love to see your shiny, happy face tomorrow, I hate for
you to make a trip all the way up to P'town just so you can sit in the
lab and eject CF cards on your old board that doesn't work like you
think.  Then again, you'll get more work done since it's so pleasant in
Pleasanton...

=20

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Sharp=20
> Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 8:28 PM
> To: Brian Stark
> Cc: Warren Gale
> Subject: Re: concrete info on CF status problem
>=20
> On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 19:54:27 -0800 "Brian Stark"
> <brian.stark@onstor.com> wrote:
>=20
> > You've sapped all my energy, so I'm taking tomorrow off. =20
> I'll have to=20
> > miss the ice cream social tomorrow.  Darn it.
>=20
> Ah, too bad.  You're going to miss out, because I've already=20
> picked up a case of Jack Daniels to bring to the ICS=20
> tomorrow, along with a fresh batch of grenades. Should be=20
> very interesting.
>=20
> > Seriously, I might have to be at home in the afternoon=20
> tomorrow, so I=20
> > won't be coming down to Campbell.  I'll be in Pleasanton in the=20
> > morning and will happily eject the CF to your heart's=20
> content.  I gave=20
> > you the terminal info, so just let me know if you want me=20
> to do this. =20
> > If we don't figure it out tomorrow, then I'll bring the=20
> system down to=20
> > Campbell on Monday (again).
>=20
> I'm dying to get after this, it's the only non-ignorable bug=20
> on my list, and I've fixed all the ignorable ones anyway.  I=20
> think I'll head up to P-town in the morning.
>=20
> > I look forward to winning the bet.  Then again, no matter what=20
> > happens, I'm sure we'll never admit it was either a kernel=20
> or hardware=20
> > bug. We'll somehow conclude it was a PROM bug and blame it on Rick.
>=20
> Well duh.  I mean, wait, Rick who?  Actually I think the answer is
> clear: there is no bug because there couldn't be.  QA "sees=20
> things" all the time, it's obviously just another one of those.
>=20
> >=20
> > =20
> >=20
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Andy Sharp
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 6:51 PM
> > > To: Brian Stark
> > > Cc: Warren Gale
> > > Subject: Re: concrete info on CF status problem
> > >=20
> > > On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 17:51:50 -0800 "Brian Stark"
> > > <brian.stark@onstor.com> wrote:
> > >=20
> > > > =20
> > > >=20
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Andy Sharp
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 5:46 PM
> > > > > To: Brian Stark
> > > > > Cc: Warren Gale
> > > > > Subject: Re: concrete info on CF status problem
> > > > >=20
> > > > > On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:51:10 -0800 "Brian Stark"
> > > > > <brian.stark@onstor.com> wrote:
> > > > >=20
> > > > > > No, I see nothing.  This is not a board problem -- the
> > > interrupt
> > > > > > is firing and something is then reading the status=20
> reg in the=20
> > > > > > 1520.
> > > > >=20
> > > > > That's OK, I recognize your denial and it's only human, after=20
> > > > > all.
> > > >=20
> > > > Good one.
> > >=20
> > > Thangyouverymuch.  I'm here all week.  Until the Ice cream social
> > > (wtf?) tomorrow, that is.
> > >=20
> > > > > > I've tried your old Rev 2 board, a Rev 3 board, and a
> > > Rev 4 board.
> > > > > > Plus, I can show you the diffs in the netlists between Rev
> > > > > 2 - Rev 4,
> > > > > > and there's nothing in the hardware that's changed with
> > > any of the
> > > > > > connections between CF, 1520, and 1125.
> > > > >=20
> > > > > What about the 1520 itself?  Different rev, different=20
> part no.,=20
> > > > > different supplier, different version? Just because
> > > nothing changed
> > > > > in the netlists doesn't rule out something not right with the=20
> > > > > way they were built.  Or if we switched to a slightly=20
> different=20
> > > > > part that's RoHS compatible or something.
> > > >=20
> > > > Nope, the 1520 is sole-sourced to TI and it hasn't changed in=20
> > > > eons. Nice try.  It ain't the 1520 or the board -- the interrupt
> > > is firing
> > > > to the 1125 and then the status reg is read.  I think I
> > > need to draw
> > > > you a picture.
> > >=20
> > > Damn, you're right, its most likely a kernel bug.  It obviously=20
> > > means nothing that between PROM, software and hardware, it's the=20
> > > only thing that hasn't changed in months.
> > > Because it couldn't be a hardware issue, despite that this all=20
> > > started on the affected systems immediately after they had their=20
> > > boards replaced.
> > >=20
> > > On a serious side, can my old board be set up in the lab here in=20
> > > Camphell tomorrow?  Are you or someone coming here tomorrow?  I=20
> > > assume so, you guys couldn't be contemplating missing the ICS.
> > >=20
>=20
