Monteleone,
No, I would say that looks right. When I define a non-ESCON CTC, I get
this:
channels detected
chan cu cu dev dev in
chandev
irq devno type type model type model pim chpids use
reg.
============================================================================
===
0x000b 0x0f00 0x05 0x3088 0x08 0x0000 0x00 0x80 0x0100000000000000 yes
yes
0x000c 0x0f01 0x05 0x3088 0x08 0x0000 0x00 0x80 0x0100000000000000 yes
yes
I would guess that an ESCON CTC such as you are using would have 0x06 in
"chan type." I'm assuming you checked for the correct cross-coupling of
read and write channels? When you ifconfig them up, does anything show up
in dmesg or /var/log/messages? What does your routing table look like?
Mark Post
-----Original Message-----
From: Monteleone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 8:45 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: CTC driver problem
Hi all,
I've got some trouble to establish a CTC connection between two native
(without vm) lpar SLES.
In the two cases, ctc's driver is correctly initialized, there's no
problem to ping themselves but no possibility to ping from one lpar to
the other.
I've already successfully done this test with suse 2.2.16 between Linux
2.2.16 and OS/390.
Question: what do you think about "channel type" for device 0C10 and
0C11 ?
I think that 0x06 should be 0x01, are you agree with me ?
channels detected
chan cu cu dev dev in
chandev
irq devno type type model type model pim chpids use
reg.
============================================================================
===
0x0158 0x0600 0x04 0x3088 0x60 0x0000 0x00 0x80 0x88ffffffffffffff yes
yes
0x0159 0x0601 0x04 0x3088 0x60 0x0000 0x00 0x80 0x88ffffffffffffff yes
yes
0x015c 0x0c10 0x06 0x3088 0x1f 0x0000 0x00 0x80 0x98ffffffffffffff yes
yes
0x015d 0x0c11 0x06 0x3088 0x1f 0x0000 0x00 0x80 0x98ffffffffffffff yes
yes
Thanks in advance for your responses.
Gerard MONTELEONE
Ingenieur Systeme & Reseau
* 04.95.23.68.09 / 06.87.72.70.32
S.I.T.E.C zi du Vazzio
20090 AJACCIO Cedex
