|
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Cydrome Leader
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 08 Aug 2005
Posts: 125
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 27, 2006 8:53 am Post subject:
Re: x2100 crappity crap
|
|
|
Frank Cusack <fcusack@fcusack.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Thought I'd get a bargain with the x2100. But first I run into the
SMDC/SP woes; mainly, console redirection does not work -- once
Solaris takes over redirect stops. ok whatever, I can use a terminal
server like the old days.
Then, I find that if I pull a hard drive, the system locks up for a
few minutes. wtf? Then, if I return the hard drive, it isn't
recognized! What kind of RAS is that??
Oh, what about the stupid LED that doesn't go out? I guess the 4100
has that problem also.
And all the other issues, like USB keyboard going away, etc.
I guess if Sun wants to sell these they need to have the BIOS (as
opposed to OBP) but ugh! Would EFI be better?
-frank
|
Yeah, sun hardware is pretty junior. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
John D Groenveld
*nix forums Guru
Joined: 19 Feb 2005
Posts: 699
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:39 pm Post subject:
Re: x2100 crappity crap
|
|
|
In article <m2fyjzzite.fsf@maguro.local>,
Frank Cusack <fcusack@fcusack.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Thought I'd get a bargain with the x2100. But first I run into the
SMDC/SP woes; mainly, console redirection does not work -- once
Solaris takes over redirect stops. ok whatever, I can use a terminal
server like the old days.
|
Did you configure the serial port as Solaris console?
eeprom output-device=ttya
eeprom input-device=ttya
eeprom console=ttya
| Quote: | Then, I find that if I pull a hard drive, the system locks up for a
few minutes. wtf? Then, if I return the hard drive, it isn't
recognized! What kind of RAS is that??
|
Are these mirrored disks? Looks like a bug in the RAID 1 controller.
| Quote: | Oh, what about the stupid LED that doesn't go out? I guess the 4100
has that problem also.
And all the other issues, like USB keyboard going away, etc.
|
No SRDBs for the x2100 on SunSolve yet.
| Quote: | I guess if Sun wants to sell these they need to have the BIOS (as
opposed to OBP) but ugh! Would EFI be better?
|
A selling point for these systems is the investment protection.
If Solaris doesn't work out, then you can swap in Windows Server
or RHAS. I don't think Microsoft or Redhat have committed to
EFI.
John
groenveld@acm.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Benjamin Gawert
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Posts: 190
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 27, 2006 3:16 pm Post subject:
Re: x2100 crappity crap
|
|
|
* John D Groenveld:
| Quote: | I don't think Microsoft or Redhat have committed to
EFI.
|
Not on x86/x64 yet. But they also have Itanium versions of their
Enterprise software, and Itanium uses EFI...
Benjamin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bruce Porter
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 21 Oct 2005
Posts: 150
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:27 pm Post subject:
Re: x2100 crappity crap
|
|
|
On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:39:14 +0000, John D Groenveld wrote:
| Quote: | In article <m2fyjzzite.fsf@maguro.local>,
Frank Cusack <fcusack@fcusack.com> wrote:
Thought I'd get a bargain with the x2100. But first I run into the
SMDC/SP woes; mainly, console redirection does not work -- once
Solaris takes over redirect stops. ok whatever, I can use a terminal
server like the old days.
Did you configure the serial port as Solaris console?
eeprom output-device=ttya
eeprom input-device=ttya
eeprom console=ttya
Then, I find that if I pull a hard drive, the system locks up for a
few minutes. wtf? Then, if I return the hard drive, it isn't
recognized! What kind of RAS is that??
Are these mirrored disks? Looks like a bug in the RAID 1 controller.
|
No HW RAID on the X2100 (last time I looked), so may be an SVM issue
| Quote: | Oh, what about the stupid LED that doesn't go out? I guess the 4100
has that problem also.
And all the other issues, like USB keyboard going away, etc.
No SRDBs for the x2100 on SunSolve yet.
I guess if Sun wants to sell these they need to have the BIOS (as
opposed to OBP) but ugh! Would EFI be better?
A selling point for these systems is the investment protection.
If Solaris doesn't work out, then you can swap in Windows Server
or RHAS. I don't think Microsoft or Redhat have committed to
EFI.
John
groenveld@acm.org
|
--
Bruce
"The internet is a huge and diverse community and
not every one is friendly"
http://www.ytc1.co.uk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frank Cusack
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 02 Mar 2005
Posts: 215
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 27, 2006 6:29 pm Post subject:
Re: x2100 crappity crap
|
|
|
On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:39:14 +0000 (UTC) groenvel@cse.psu.edu (John D Groenveld) wrote:
| Quote: | In article <m2fyjzzite.fsf@maguro.local>,
Frank Cusack <fcusack@fcusack.com> wrote:
Thought I'd get a bargain with the x2100. But first I run into the
SMDC/SP woes; mainly, console redirection does not work -- once
Solaris takes over redirect stops. ok whatever, I can use a terminal
server like the old days.
Did you configure the serial port as Solaris console?
eeprom output-device=ttya
eeprom input-device=ttya
eeprom console=ttya
|
No. I was trying to use the video->SMDC console redirection, to
avoid having to use the serial port. This is documented as not
working. It does work for the bios, but stops when Solaris boots.
Of course (?) if I set Solaris to use the serial console, and use
video->serial console redirection, then it works. But then I need
a terminal server.
I think the breakage is due to Solaris resetting bge0, which is
shared with the SP.
| Quote: | Then, I find that if I pull a hard drive, the system locks up for a
few minutes. wtf? Then, if I return the hard drive, it isn't
recognized! What kind of RAS is that??
Are these mirrored disks? Looks like a bug in the RAID 1 controller.
|
SVM
Can you verify that this works for you?
| Quote: | Oh, what about the stupid LED that doesn't go out? I guess the 4100
has that problem also.
And all the other issues, like USB keyboard going away, etc.
No SRDBs for the x2100 on SunSolve yet.
|
The release notes (819-3722-13) document these issues. Ah ... now
I see the SATA issue there, hadn't noticed it before. !#@%@!%
Never would have bought the thing in the first place if I'd read
that more carefully.
Any insiders have any ideas on when/if these issues might get fixed?
It's a good server (at the right price), it's just that a lot of
hardware RAS features don't work under Solaris! blah.
-frank |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Daniel Rock
*nix forums Guru
Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 316
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 27, 2006 7:06 pm Post subject:
Re: x2100 crappity crap
|
|
|
Bruce Porter <bdp@ytc1noargeyspam.co.uk> wrote:
| Quote: | On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:39:14 +0000, John D Groenveld wrote:
In article <m2fyjzzite.fsf@maguro.local>,
Frank Cusack <fcusack@fcusack.com> wrote:
Then, I find that if I pull a hard drive, the system locks up for a
few minutes. wtf? Then, if I return the hard drive, it isn't
recognized! What kind of RAS is that??
Are these mirrored disks? Looks like a bug in the RAID 1 controller.
No HW RAID on the X2100 (last time I looked), so may be an SVM issue
|
No, it is more a problem of the IDE driver which has quite large timeout
values in case of disk errors. I have seen it several times on my machine
with a dying disk drive: Even though the other disks (all ok) are on another
controller they will get affected also:
This is the failing disk:
15:02:03 ata_command: select failed DRDY 0x0 CMD 0x91 F 0x0 N 0x3f S 0x0 H 0xe CL 0x0 CH 0x0
15:02:03 ata_init_dev_parms: failed
15:02:03 WARNING: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@6/ide@0 (ata0):
15:02:03 timeout: early timeout, target=0 lun=0
15:02:03 WARNING: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@6/ide@0 (ata0):
15:02:03 timeout: early timeout, target=1 lun=0
15:02:03 WARNING: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@6/ide@0/cmdk@0,0 (Disk2):
15:02:03 Error for command 'write sector' Error Level: Informational
15:02:03 Sense Key: aborted command
15:02:03 Vendor 'Gen-ATA ' error code: 0x3
15:02:03 WARNING: md: d101: write error on /dev/dsk/c0d0s6
Trying to revive it in the evening...
22:13:22 WARNING: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@6/ide@0 (ata0):
22:13:22 timeout: early timeout, target=0 lun=0
22:13:22 WARNING: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@6/ide@0/cmdk@0,0 (Disk2):
22:13:22 Error for command 'read sector' Error Level: Informational
22:13:22 Sense Key: aborted command
22:13:22 Vendor 'Gen-ATA ' error code: 0x3
.... caused a timeout on the second disk on the same bus ...
22:13:57 WARNING: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@6/ide@0 (ata0):
22:13:57 timeout: abort request, target=1 lun=0
22:13:57 WARNING: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@6/ide@0 (ata0):
22:13:57 timeout: abort device, target=1 lun=0
22:13:57 WARNING: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@6/ide@0 (ata0):
22:13:57 timeout: reset target, target=1 lun=0
22:13:57 WARNING: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@6/ide@0 (ata0):
22:13:57 timeout: reset bus, target=1 lun=0
22:14:35 ata_command: select failed DRDY 0x0 CMD 0x91 F 0x0 N 0x3f S 0x0 H 0xe CL 0x0 CH 0x0
22:14:35 ata_init_dev_parms: failed
22:14:35 WARNING: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@6/ide@0/cmdk@1,0 (Disk3):
22:14:35 Error for command 'read sector' Error Level: Informational
22:14:35 Sense Key: aborted command
22:14:35 Vendor 'Gen-ATA ' error code: 0x3
.... and also timeouts on another unrelated IDE controller (the one above was
PATA, this one is SATA):
22:14:35 WARNING: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@7/ide@0 (ata2):
22:14:35 timeout: early timeout, target=0 lun=0
22:14:35 WARNING: /pci@0,0/pci-ide@7/ide@0/cmdk@0,0 (Disk4):
22:14:35 Error for command 'read sector' Error Level: Informational
22:14:35 Sense Key: aborted command
22:14:35 Vendor 'Gen-ATA ' error code: 0x3
22:14:35 WARNING: md: d11: read error on /dev/dsk/c2d0s0
.... and also all of my other disks.
Result: All my md's were in state Maintenance, both mirror halves either
in Maintenance or Last Erred, I had to run a lot of "metareplace -e
dXX cXdYsZ" - which takes some time on 400 GB mirrored (~5 hours to bring
the mirror back to state Ok)
It should get better in the future with a native SATA driver.
--
Daniel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andrew Gabriel
*nix forums Guru
Joined: 19 Feb 2005
Posts: 454
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 7:40 am Post subject:
Re: x2100 crappity crap
|
|
|
In article <4bc5j8Fs9uovU1@individual.net>,
Benjamin Gawert <bgawert@gmx.de> writes:
| Quote: | * John D Groenveld:
I don't think Microsoft or Redhat have committed to
EFI.
Not on x86/x64 yet. But they also have Itanium versions of their
Enterprise software, and Itanium uses EFI...
|
Intel's next generation of its Centrino notebook platform
due early next year is rumoured to be EFI. Apple is already
using it.
--
Andrew Gabriel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Benjamin Gawert
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Posts: 190
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 9:41 am Post subject:
Re: x2100 crappity crap
|
|
|
* Andrew Gabriel:
| Quote: | I don't think Microsoft or Redhat have committed to
EFI.
Not on x86/x64 yet. But they also have Itanium versions of their
Enterprise software, and Itanium uses EFI...
Intel's next generation of its Centrino notebook platform
due early next year is rumoured to be EFI.
|
I doubt it because MS clearly stated that Vista won't support EFI, and
in Longhorn server its only the IA64 variant that supports EFI.
| Quote: | Apple is already
using it.
|
Apple isn't selling Windows but MacOS X which of course has no problems
with EFI. And it took some real effort to get Windowsxp running on the
intel Macs (one of this effort was retrofitting a BIOS emulation in the
system firmware)...
Benjamin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Casper H.S. Dik
*nix forums Guru
Joined: 20 Feb 2005
Posts: 1634
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 1:49 pm Post subject:
Re: x2100 crappity crap
|
|
|
Frank Cusack <fcusack@fcusack.com> writes:
| Quote: | No. I was trying to use the video->SMDC console redirection, to
avoid having to use the serial port. This is documented as not
working. It does work for the bios, but stops when Solaris boots.
I think the breakage is due to Solaris resetting bge0, which is
shared with the SP.
|
Correct; known issue.
| Quote: | Any insiders have any ideas on when/if these issues might get fixed?
It's a good server (at the right price), it's just that a lot of
hardware RAS features don't work under Solaris! blah.
|
We're working hard to fix all those issues.
But the bleeding edge were fixes happen first is Solaris Nevada.
E.g., the sideband NIC bug was fixed in Nevada around 3 months ago;
the bug id is 6337341.
But it's also patched in 122028-02. Have you tried that patch?
Casper
--
Expressed in this posting are my opinions. They are in no way related
to opinions held by my employer, Sun Microsystems.
Statements on Sun products included here are not gospel and may
be fiction rather than truth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bruce Porter
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 21 Oct 2005
Posts: 150
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 9:29 pm Post subject:
Re: x2100 crappity crap
|
|
|
On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 11:41:08 +0200, Benjamin Gawert wrote:
| Quote: | * Andrew Gabriel:
anip |
| Quote: | Apple is already
using it.
Apple isn't selling Windows but MacOS X which of course has no problems
with EFI. And it took some real effort to get Windowsxp running on the
intel Macs (one of this effort was retrofitting a BIOS emulation in the
system firmware)...
|
I gather running any OS other than MacOS on an Intel based Apple is
difficult.
Because "They made it so"
--
Bruce
"The internet is a huge and diverse community and
not every one is friendly"
http://www.ytc1.co.uk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frank Cusack
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 02 Mar 2005
Posts: 215
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 11:48 pm Post subject:
Re: x2100 crappity crap
|
|
|
On 28 Apr 2006 13:49:35 GMT Casper H.S. Dik <Casper.Dik@Sun.COM> wrote:
| Quote: | We're working hard to fix all those issues.
But the bleeding edge were fixes happen first is Solaris Nevada.
|
huh. Well, I'm not going to use this hardware for anything now, so
that gives me a good reason/way to check out solaris express. goody!
| Quote: | E.g., the sideband NIC bug was fixed in Nevada around 3 months ago;
the bug id is 6337341.
But it's also patched in 122028-02. Have you tried that patch?
|
Thanks, i'll give it a whirl before going to nevada.
-frank |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frank Cusack
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 02 Mar 2005
Posts: 215
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 11:51 pm Post subject:
Re: x2100 crappity crap
|
|
|
On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 11:41:08 +0200 Benjamin Gawert <bgawert@gmx.de> wrote:
| Quote: | Apple isn't selling Windows but MacOS X which of course has no
problems with EFI. And it took some real effort to get Windowsxp
running on the intel Macs (one of this effort was retrofitting a BIOS
emulation in the system firmware)...
|
Huh, well if Apple can do EFI and write a BIOS emulation then so can Sun!
Or maybe Sun can do an OF/OBP thing and add a BIOS emulation layer. It
sure would enhance the x86 hardware offering.
-frank |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rich Teer
*nix forums Guru
Joined: 21 Feb 2005
Posts: 1038
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 29, 2006 2:10 am Post subject:
Re: x2100 crappity crap
|
|
|
On Fri, 28 Apr 2006, Frank Cusack wrote:
| Quote: | Huh, well if Apple can do EFI and write a BIOS emulation then so can Sun!
Or maybe Sun can do an OF/OBP thing and add a BIOS emulation layer. It
sure would enhance the x86 hardware offering.
|
Agreed. Having to deal with the bletcherousness of the BIOS after being
used to OBP is a bit of a shock. Scotty's expression in Star Trek IV
comes to mind: "BIOS? How quaint!".
--
Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA, OpenSolaris CAB member
President,
Rite Online Inc.
Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: http://www.rite-group.com/rich |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Benjamin Gawert
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Posts: 190
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 29, 2006 11:57 am Post subject:
Re: x2100 crappity crap
|
|
|
* Bruce Porter:
| Quote: | I gather running any OS other than MacOS on an Intel based Apple is
difficult.
Because "They made it so"
|
No. It's just that Apple decided not to rely on the ancient BIOS but on
EFI which is much more flexible and versatile. The problem is that not
much operating systems support EFI _and_ x86 at the same time...
Benjamin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frank Cusack
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 02 Mar 2005
Posts: 215
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 11:59 pm Post subject:
Re: x2100 crappity crap
|
|
|
On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 19:06:11 +0000 (UTC) "Daniel Rock" <v200617@deadcafe.de> wrote:
| Quote: | It should get better in the future with a native SATA driver.
|
So does S10_U2 not have a native SATA driver? I just installed and tested
and it has the same problems (with the same syslog messages) as before.
From Casper's post, I'd expected U2 to work a lot better.
-frank |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Google
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
The time now is Wed Dec 03, 2008 8:03 pm | All times are GMT
|
|
Mortgage | Naruto | Debt Consolidation | Northern Rock | Loans
|
|
Copyright © 2004-2005 DeniX Solutions SRL
|
|
|
|
Other DeniX Solutions sites:
Unix/Linux blog |
electronics forum |
medicine forum |
science forum |
|
|
Privacy Policy
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Forum index
»
*nix
»
Solaris
»
x86
