[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Odd network behaviour

On Wed, 2 Oct 2002, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> In fact, that is so bad I can't believe the PIO mode -u0 would be like that,
> otherwise heaps more people would be having heaps more problems... it also
> wouldn't surprise me in this day of ATA-133 if some new drives had very bad
> PIO mode implementations. In any case -d1 avoids all these potential
> problems and makes your HDD heaps faster :-) 
> I suspect you might have some marginal hardware issues too that contribute
> to the problem. IRQ conflicts and/or a misconfigured serial port can do it
> (ie, does it think they are 16450's or 89xx? UARTS with no FIFO... hence
> configuring them with the FIFO disabled?).

It's a Seagate Baracuda IV ATA-100 I think.. I'd believe that it could run 
pretty badly in PIO mode, but it's the same drive I had in the old board,
so the idea of an IRQ conflict does sound like one I should check up, as 
does the misconfiguring of the serial ports. I'll give them a good check 
over and see if theres something out of whack there.

> Do you have any strange hardware in the machine? If this hardware had a
> dodgey driver with very long irq-blocking interrupt service routines you
> could also hit this problem. In this case the irqtune would probably help,
> but you might still hit it occasionaly.

There's not a lot of stuff in the system:
D-Link 550TX 10/100 Nic using the sundance module
Radeon 8500
AMD XP 2200+
GA-7VRX mainboard
SB Live! Value
3Com US Robotics 56K External modem

I don't really see the live or Radeon causing a problem, as neither of 
these are really doing all that much when the problem occurs. So either 
the mainboard or D-Link Nic could be making the issues. Although as I 
said, from what you've told me I'd say this I'll check the serial config 
and check for and conflicts.

Thanks for the explanations, I'm not too good with hardware knowledge so 
the detail is greatly appreciated.

Freedom is just chaos with better lighting. 

Reply to: