AF:
NF:0
PS:10
SRH:1
SFN:
DSR:
MID:<20071112171343.0801ea3c@ripper.onstor.net>
CFG:
PT:0
S:andy.sharp@onstor.com
RQ:
SSV:onstor-exch02.onstor.net
NSV:
SSH:
R:<rick.lund@onstor.com>,<brian.stark@onstor.com>,<maxim.kozlovsky@onstor.com>
MAID:1
X-Sylpheed-Privacy-System:
X-Sylpheed-Sign:0
SCF:#mh/Mailbox/sent
RMID:#imap/andys@onstor.net@onstor-exch02.onstor.net/INBOX	0	BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0A4470@onstor-exch02.onstor.net
X-Sylpheed-End-Special-Headers: 1
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 17:13:48 -0800
From: Andrew Sharp <andy.sharp@onstor.com>
To: "Rick Lund" <rick.lund@onstor.com>
Cc: "Brian Stark" <brian.stark@onstor.com>, "Maxim Kozlovsky"
 <maxim.kozlovsky@onstor.com>
Subject: Re: idea on cksseg problem
Message-ID: <20071112171348.7482b1b5@ripper.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0A4470@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
References: <20071105111450.1389cc29@ripper.onstor.net>
	<BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0A4470@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
Organization: Onstor
X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.6.0 (GTK+ 2.8.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I'm hard pressed right at the moment to think of what else it might be,
however, Brian told me today that you guys are getting a TLB exception
these days when you try to access 0xffffffffc0000000.  That would
suggest to me that it should be working now and all I have to do is try
it on a new-ish prom.  The CFE is, however, 32 bits, correct?  And this
address being defacto mapped to the memory controller doesn't happen
in 32 bit mode.  Then again maybe you have a 64-bit CFE.

Cheers,

a

On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 11:37:19 -0800 "Rick Lund" <rick.lund@onstor.com>
wrote:

> We are using the CFE draminit code, which as I remember, only
> initializes the memory ranges for the amount of memory which
> physically exists.  I will check the CS settings, but I don't think
> this is the problem. -Rick
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: Andy Sharp
> Sent: Mon 11/5/2007 11:14 AM
> To: Brian Stark
> Cc: Rick Lund; Maxim Kozlovsky
> Subject: idea on cksseg problem
> 
> 
> 
> I am forming a theory on why we vapor lock when accessing cksseg0
> address -- we aren't being selective enough on what addresses are
> mapped/configured to memory banks.  We need to make sure that we
> map/configure only those addresses that have actual physical memory.
> I suspect we are letting the default configuration take place, which
> is specified in the 1250 manual.   We don't have any memory at
> 0xc000.0000 but perhaps we have that address range configured to go
> to the memory controller when we shouldn't, causing vapor lock
> whenever we access it.
> 
> Does this make any sense to anyone?  Causing any bells to ring?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> a
> 
> PS There is a good reference to this on page 137 of the 1250 User
> Manual (that's the PDF page number, page 109 of the internal document
> numbering).
> 
> 
