AF:
NF:0
PS:10
SRH:1
SFN:
DSR:
MID:
CFG:
PT:0
S:andy.sharp@lsi.com
RQ:
SSV:mhbs.lsil.com
NSV:
SSH:
R:<Terence.Rokop@lsi.com>,<Larry.Scheer@lsi.com>,<John.Keiffer@lsi.com>,<Abdallah.Harb@lsi.com>,<Richard.Hardiman@lsi.com>,<Sandrine.Boulanger@lsi.com>
MAID:2
X-Sylpheed-Privacy-System:
X-Sylpheed-Sign:0
SCF:#mh/Mailbox/sent
RMID:#imap/LSI/INBOX	0	44EA562EC48D0841B3E89B48277301F4EDB3CDCB@cosmail02.lsi.com
X-Sylpheed-End-Special-Headers: 1
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 14:17:40 -0800
From: Andrew Sharp <andy.sharp@lsi.com>
To: "Rokop, Terence" <Terence.Rokop@lsi.com>
Cc: "Scheer, Larry" <Larry.Scheer@lsi.com>, "Keiffer, John"
 <John.Keiffer@lsi.com>, "Harb, Abdallah" <Abdallah.Harb@lsi.com>,
 "Hardiman, Richard" <Richard.Hardiman@lsi.com>, "Boulanger, Sandrine"
 <Sandrine.Boulanger@lsi.com>
Subject: Re: Cougar Info
Message-ID: <20100218141740.77523af4@ripper.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <44EA562EC48D0841B3E89B48277301F4EDB3CDCB@cosmail02.lsi.com>
References: <971FF6D485B6914FAF8484E0BDAF6BD7BCF2D0B8@cosmail01.lsi.com>
	<27AEC73CFDE2EA41849ACAC11A0B39D5CD5674CC@cosmail03.lsi.com>
	<85A1D09038E3C1438820EF7A7FAFDD30010ACEEA5B@cosmail01.lsi.com>
	<85A1D09038E3C1438820EF7A7FAFDD30010ACEEA5E@cosmail01.lsi.com>
	<85A1D09038E3C1438820EF7A7FAFDD30010ACEEA75@cosmail01.lsi.com>
	<44EA562EC48D0841B3E89B48277301F4EDB3CCE0@cosmail02.lsi.com>
	<DEC609CD0E54B2448DAF023C89AE9755EB50C434@cosmail02.lsi.com>
	<20100218135306.5ed23647@ripper.onstor.net>
	<44EA562EC48D0841B3E89B48277301F4EDB3CDCB@cosmail02.lsi.com>
Organization: LSI
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

If you eventually succeeded in upgrading, then perhaps I was wrong and
the message referred to a CRC error in the prom image itself caused by
some sort of tftp problem.  Which would mean that it's a crappy error
message for not being more forthcoming.

We've got prom level diags for everything, perhaps I will look up the
error message and if I'm still worried, we can run a diag to check
things more stringently.

On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 15:11:13 -0700 "Rokop, Terence"
<Terence.Rokop@lsi.com> wrote:

> Thanks -- that's worrying.  The machine is g6r64 (10.2.64.6), in case
> anyone does want to run tests on the PROM chips.
> 
> As it turns out, there was probably nothing wrong with the PROM that
> was there; I just mistakenly thought there might be.  I was trying,
> for the first time, to boot up a Cougar with FP and TXRX binaries
> that I had built myself (from the /dev branch), but the FP and TXRX
> weren't coming up -- they were apparently crashing so early in boot
> that I couldn't even attach a debugger to them, and they weren't
> producing any messages, at least none that the SSC could log (all it
> noticed was that they were unresponsive).  I asked some of my fellow
> new hires whether anyone had seen that, and no one had, but someone
> suggested trying a flash initialization using recent images from a
> nightly build of 4.1.0.0, so I went through that process.
> 
> After the flash initialization, I noticed in "system show version"
> that while "NFP_TXRX" and "NFP_FP" had been updated, the "PROM"
> version strings were still old, so I searched the wiki, found the
> PROM upgrade procedure, and tried it, ending up encountering the
> error I described.  After seeing the error, I decided to try booting
> off my own FP and TXRX binaries again, and found that it worked --
> apparently the flash initialization was sufficient, and the PROM
> upgrade wasn't necessary.  However, when Larry pointed out that the
> PROMs I'd been trying to upgrade to were not the most recent ones, I
> tried upgrading them to PROMs I'd built myself (again from the /dev
> branch) just to see whether that made a difference, and it turned out
> to do so -- those upgrades worked.  (If the problem is with the PROM
> chips themselves, though, then it was probably mere luck that the
> layout of the PROM from the R4.1.0.0 nightly build tickled the
> hardware bug, whereas the one I built myself did not.)
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Sharp [mailto:andy.sharp@lsi.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2010 1:53 PM
> To: Scheer, Larry
> Cc: Rokop, Terence; Keiffer, John; Harb, Abdallah; Hardiman, Richard;
> Boulanger, Sandrine Subject: Re: Cougar Info
> 
> Ah, yeah, that message looks like bad PROM chips to me.  Let Rich know
> which filer it is and he and Abdallah can run some tests on it to be
> sure.
> 
> Nobody should ever have to build the PROM.  Although it is much easier
> than it used to be!
> 
> Out of curiosity, what was wrong with the PROM that was there?  What
> was the reason to upgrade it?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> a 
