Re: debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso (rel 2018-02-16T23:09:00) Networking issues on Blade 150

2018-02-22 Thread Jerome Ibanes 
Hello Frank,

https://eskimo.com/~jibanes/sparc/idprom2.jpg

I did change the mac address, as you can see in the screenshot linked
above, but it lead to the same outcome. Could you think of anything
else I should try? I could change the byte at fff4dfd9 to 80, but I'm
afraid it would lead to the same result. I can't think the network
adapter is defective because I can use it on other operating systems,
and when configured manually (prior to the installer's network
configuration) it works fine, if/when I let the installer deal with
this, even manually assigning an ip address, I do not have network
connectivity at all.

On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 1:02 AM, Frank Scheiner  wrote:
> Hi Jerome,
>
> On 02/22/2018 01:23 AM, Jerome Ibanes wrote:
>>
>> Frank,
>>
>> Could you try the following in obp:
>> cd /pci@1f,0/ebus@c/eeprom@1,0
>> fff4bfd0 30 dump
>> and tell me the numbers in fff4bfd8 and fff4bfd9, I would like to know
>> if it's 01 80 or 01 83
>
>
> That must be the "(real) machine type" (the second byte only, which is the
> first byte of a hostid). Without looking at it, I can say from my banner
> message that I have "(01) 80" currently in there, but I don't know the
> original value. I hadn't recorded that information before my NVRAM battery
> was depleted and I couldn't find a banner message from a Blade 100 online,
> so assumed "80" is correct.
>
> [1] on page 17 shows it to be "83" for a Blade 150 (which seems to be
> correct, see below). On the other hand [2] on page 67 shows it to be "61"
> for a Blade 100 - which must be plain wrong as [3] lists it as starting with
> "8". Maybe it was "80" for Blade 100s that use the 08:00:20 block and "83"
> for Blade 100s that use the 00:03:ba block, which would make "80" actually
> wrong for my machine and used MAC address block.
>
> [1]:
> https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19127-01/blade150.ws/816-4379-10/816-4379-10.pdf
>
> [2]:
> https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19127-01/blade100.ws/806-3416-10/806-3416-10.pdf
>
> [3]:
> https://web.archive.org/web/20030116022314/http://sunsolve.sun.com:80/handbook_pub/Devices/IDPROM/IDPROM_Parts.html?wrapper=false
>
> But as my machine doesn't show any issues with IP address auto-configuration
> from the installer despite the assumed wrong "(real) machine type" in the
> hostid, it might be unrelated to your problem.
>
> Cheers,
> Frank

Re: debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso (rel 2018-02-16T23:09:00) Networking issues on Blade 150

2018-02-22 Thread Frank Scheiner 

Hi Jerome,

On 02/22/2018 01:23 AM, Jerome Ibanes wrote:

Frank,

Could you try the following in obp:
cd /pci@1f,0/ebus@c/eeprom@1,0
fff4bfd0 30 dump
and tell me the numbers in fff4bfd8 and fff4bfd9, I would like to know
if it's 01 80 or 01 83


That must be the "(real) machine type" (the second byte only, which is 
the first byte of a hostid). Without looking at it, I can say from my 
banner message that I have "(01) 80" currently in there, but I don't 
know the original value. I hadn't recorded that information before my 
NVRAM battery was depleted and I couldn't find a banner message from a 
Blade 100 online, so assumed "80" is correct.


[1] on page 17 shows it to be "83" for a Blade 150 (which seems to be 
correct, see below). On the other hand [2] on page 67 shows it to be 
"61" for a Blade 100 - which must be plain wrong as [3] lists it as 
starting with "8". Maybe it was "80" for Blade 100s that use the 
08:00:20 block and "83" for Blade 100s that use the 00:03:ba block, 
which would make "80" actually wrong for my machine and used MAC address 
block.


[1]: 
https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19127-01/blade150.ws/816-4379-10/816-4379-10.pdf


[2]: 
https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19127-01/blade100.ws/806-3416-10/806-3416-10.pdf


[3]: 
https://web.archive.org/web/20030116022314/http://sunsolve.sun.com:80/handbook_pub/Devices/IDPROM/IDPROM_Parts.html?wrapper=false


But as my machine doesn't show any issues with IP address 
auto-configuration from the installer despite the assumed wrong "(real) 
machine type" in the hostid, it might be unrelated to your problem.


Cheers,
Frank

Re: debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso (rel 2018-02-16T23:09:00) Networking issues on Blade 150

2018-02-21 Thread Jerome Ibanes 
Frank,

Could you try the following in obp:
cd /pci@1f,0/ebus@c/eeprom@1,0
fff4bfd0 30 dump
and tell me the numbers in fff4bfd8 and fff4bfd9, I would like to know
if it's 01 80 or 01 83

thank you

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 12:20 PM, Frank Scheiner  wrote:
> Hi Jerome,
>
> On 02/21/2018 08:39 PM, Jerome Ibanes wrote:
>>
>> * Is there a chance that your local DHCP setup is not working properly?
>> I highly doubt it, as it works well for another operating system on
>> this blade, although after the dhcp client failure from the installer,
>> I chose the option to setup the ip address manually, but it was unable
>> to succeed doing so.
>
>
> What does your DHCP server log when you're trying the IP auto-configuration
> from the installer? Compare it with what happens when this is done on
> Solaris.
>
>>
>> Do you think the nvram swap caused this issue, and should I reprogram
>> the chip to its former mac address?
>
>
> No, not really, I actually expect it to work with any MAC address, although
> it could make problems to use a MAC address not from Sun's MAC address
> blocks, but that's not the case for you. I just wondered about the how. :-)
>
> But you could give it a try, of course. While there's no mkp/mkpl in v4.x
> OBP, it could work using the description on [1]. Also the Sun NVRAM/hostid
> FAQ ([2]) mentions this method. But I haven't tried this yet for myself, so
> no guarantee that it will work.
>
> [1]: https://github.com/MrSparc/idprom-repair
> [2]: http://www.obsolyte.com/sunFAQ/faq_nvram.html#arcane
>
> But maybe it's not worth the effort to go back to the original MAC address
> if the machine works well with Solaris.
>
> Did you reset the OBP environment vars after you installed the new NVRAM
> into your Blade 150? If it was programmed in another Sun machine (not a
> Blade 150 but e.g. a Sun Enterprise 250), it could contain garbage from the
> other machine.
>
> Cheers,
> Frank

Re: debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso (rel 2018-02-16T23:09:00) Networking issues on Blade 150

2018-02-21 Thread Jerome Ibanes 
Hello Frank,

Thanks for looking into this.

* What installation mode did you use?
The "normal mode", similar to yours.

* I always assumed that MAC addresses from the 08:00:20 block were
only used with "older" Sun machines.
They might, my blade has 8:0:20:c8:f4:a7, but historically had
00:03:ba:dc:0c:57; I had to change the nvram chip when its battery ran
out, it's quite possible that the new one changed my blade's mac
address, I would be surprised if this caused the issue, but it's not
impossible.

* Is there a chance that your local DHCP setup is not working properly?
I highly doubt it, as it works well for another operating system on
this blade, although after the dhcp client failure from the installer,
I chose the option to setup the ip address manually, but it was unable
to succeed doing so.

Do you think the nvram swap caused this issue, and should I reprogram
the chip to its former mac address?
Jerome

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 11:07 AM, Frank Scheiner  wrote:
> Hi Jerome,
>
> On 02/21/2018 04:00 AM, Jerome Ibanes wrote:
>>
>> The same behavior is observed using
>> https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/ports/debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso
>> Timestamped "2018-02-07 20:35" (md5=be24e824141daf81e8ca3640a1f59f9a)
>> Hope this helps.
>
>
> I fetched my Blade 100 (should be close enough to a Blade 150) from storage
> and gave both the latest sparc64 ISO image ([1], dated 2018-02-16 23:09) at
> Adrian's space and the official one ([2], dated 2018-02-07 20:35) a try
> today. In contrast to what you experienced, I didn't experience any issues
> with the network configuration done by the installer so far.
>
> [1]:
> https://people.debian.org/~glaubitz/debian-cd/debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso
>
> [2]:
> https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/ports/debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso
>
> Installation was done in normal mode for both images. I stopped the
> installation with the official one after network configuration succeeded.
>
> What installation mode did you use?
>
> We have the same OBP version and I assume apart from the CPU most of our
> hardware should be identical. A difference is that your Blade 150 seems to
> use a MAC address from the 08:00:20 block, whereas mine uses a MAC address
> from the 00:03:ba block. I always assumed that MAC addresses from the
> 08:00:20 block were only used with "older" Sun machines. But maybe the Blade
> 100 and 150 were available with both. Shouldn't make a difference, but was
> unexpected.
>
> Is there a chance that your local DHCP setup is not working properly?
>
> Or maybe I misunderstood you at this point:
>
> Did you expect an automatic configuration with DHCP from the installer or
> were you manually configuring IP addresses in the installer dialogues and it
> couldn't or didn't configure your network interface properly?
>
> I always use DHCP so never tested if the manual network configuration done
> via the installer works.
>
> Cheers,
> Frank

Re: debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso (rel 2018-02-16T23:09:00) Networking issues on Blade 150

2018-02-21 Thread Frank Scheiner 

Hi Jerome,

On 02/21/2018 08:39 PM, Jerome Ibanes wrote:

* Is there a chance that your local DHCP setup is not working properly?
I highly doubt it, as it works well for another operating system on
this blade, although after the dhcp client failure from the installer,
I chose the option to setup the ip address manually, but it was unable
to succeed doing so.


What does your DHCP server log when you're trying the IP 
auto-configuration from the installer? Compare it with what happens when 
this is done on Solaris.




Do you think the nvram swap caused this issue, and should I reprogram
the chip to its former mac address?


No, not really, I actually expect it to work with any MAC address, 
although it could make problems to use a MAC address not from Sun's MAC 
address blocks, but that's not the case for you. I just wondered about 
the how. :-)


But you could give it a try, of course. While there's no mkp/mkpl in 
v4.x OBP, it could work using the description on [1]. Also the Sun 
NVRAM/hostid FAQ ([2]) mentions this method. But I haven't tried this 
yet for myself, so no guarantee that it will work.


[1]: https://github.com/MrSparc/idprom-repair
[2]: http://www.obsolyte.com/sunFAQ/faq_nvram.html#arcane

But maybe it's not worth the effort to go back to the original MAC 
address if the machine works well with Solaris.


Did you reset the OBP environment vars after you installed the new NVRAM 
into your Blade 150? If it was programmed in another Sun machine (not a 
Blade 150 but e.g. a Sun Enterprise 250), it could contain garbage from 
the other machine.


Cheers,
Frank

Re: debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso (rel 2018-02-16T23:09:00) Networking issues on Blade 150

2018-02-21 Thread Frank Scheiner 

Hi Jerome,

On 02/21/2018 04:00 AM, Jerome Ibanes wrote:

The same behavior is observed using
https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/ports/debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso
Timestamped "2018-02-07 20:35" (md5=be24e824141daf81e8ca3640a1f59f9a)
Hope this helps.


I fetched my Blade 100 (should be close enough to a Blade 150) from 
storage and gave both the latest sparc64 ISO image ([1], dated 
2018-02-16 23:09) at Adrian's space and the official one ([2], dated 
2018-02-07 20:35) a try today. In contrast to what you experienced, I 
didn't experience any issues with the network configuration done by the 
installer so far.


[1]: 
https://people.debian.org/~glaubitz/debian-cd/debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso


[2]: 
https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/ports/debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso


Installation was done in normal mode for both images. I stopped the 
installation with the official one after network configuration succeeded.


What installation mode did you use?

We have the same OBP version and I assume apart from the CPU most of our 
hardware should be identical. A difference is that your Blade 150 seems 
to use a MAC address from the 08:00:20 block, whereas mine uses a MAC 
address from the 00:03:ba block. I always assumed that MAC addresses 
from the 08:00:20 block were only used with "older" Sun machines. But 
maybe the Blade 100 and 150 were available with both. Shouldn't make a 
difference, but was unexpected.


Is there a chance that your local DHCP setup is not working properly?

Or maybe I misunderstood you at this point:

Did you expect an automatic configuration with DHCP from the installer 
or were you manually configuring IP addresses in the installer dialogues 
and it couldn't or didn't configure your network interface properly?


I always use DHCP so never tested if the manual network configuration 
done via the installer works.


Cheers,
Frank

Re: debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso (rel 2018-02-16T23:09:00) Networking issues on Blade 150

2018-02-20 Thread Jerome Ibanes 
Hello Adrian,

The same behavior is observed using
https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/ports/debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso
Timestamped "2018-02-07 20:35" (md5=be24e824141daf81e8ca3640a1f59f9a)
Hope this helps.

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 7:57 AM, Jerome Ibanes  wrote:
> I see, I can try the official one if you want, and report my findings
> within a few hours.
> Stay tuned!
>
>
> Jerome
>
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 7:54 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
>  wrote:
>> On 02/20/2018 04:49 PM, Jerome Ibanes wrote:
>>>
>>> That's the image I have tried, see the thread title "2018-02-16 23:09".
>>> 28311de5f603397922e767f1083b3418  debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso
>>
>>
>> Well, that image is not the official one.
>>
>> The official ones are here:
>>
>>> https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/ports/
>>
>>
>> The images in my personal webspace are purely for my own testing
>> and development purposes.
>>
>>
>> Adrian
>>
>> --
>>  .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
>> : :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
>> `. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
>>   `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913

Re: debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso (rel 2018-02-16T23:09:00) Networking issues on Blade 150

2018-02-20 Thread Jerome Ibanes 
I see, I can try the official one if you want, and report my findings
within a few hours.
Stay tuned!


Jerome

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 7:54 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
 wrote:
> On 02/20/2018 04:49 PM, Jerome Ibanes wrote:
>>
>> That's the image I have tried, see the thread title "2018-02-16 23:09".
>> 28311de5f603397922e767f1083b3418  debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso
>
>
> Well, that image is not the official one.
>
> The official ones are here:
>
>> https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/ports/
>
>
> The images in my personal webspace are purely for my own testing
> and development purposes.
>
>
> Adrian
>
> --
>  .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> : :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
> `. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
>   `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913

Re: debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso (rel 2018-02-16T23:09:00) Networking issues on Blade 150

2018-02-20 Thread John Paul Adrian Glaubitz 

On 02/20/2018 04:49 PM, Jerome Ibanes wrote:

That's the image I have tried, see the thread title "2018-02-16 23:09".
28311de5f603397922e767f1083b3418  debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso


Well, that image is not the official one.

The official ones are here:


https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/ports/


The images in my personal webspace are purely for my own testing
and development purposes.

Adrian

--
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913

Re: debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso (rel 2018-02-16T23:09:00) Networking issues on Blade 150

2018-02-20 Thread John Paul Adrian Glaubitz 
On 02/20/2018 05:17 AM, Jerome Ibanes wrote:
> Installer fails to setup networking, I switched to a console, no ip
> address was assigned, I issued
> "ip link set enp0s12f1", the blade locked up for a few seconds then displayed:

Can you try this image?

> https://people.debian.org/~glaubitz/debian-cd/debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso

Note: This image currently doesn't detect which partition type sparc64 uses
  but that's known and also because this is a work-in-progress.

> Thank you Adrian for keeping this port alive.

You're welcome. But there are many more involved. Join us on #debian-ports 
(OFTC).

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913

debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso (rel 2018-02-16T23:09:00) Networking issues on Blade 150

2018-02-19 Thread Jerome Ibanes 
Installer fails to setup networking, I switched to a console, no ip
address was assigned, I issued
"ip link set enp0s12f1", the blade locked up for a few seconds then displayed:

[585.625540] watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#0 stuck for 22s! [kworker/0:1:23]

Keyboard no longer worked after issuing the command, Solaris can use
networking on this same
blade (meaning no hardware defect, presumably). I have repeated the
test with the same outcome.

What is relatively surprising is that if I issue this _same_ command
_prior_ to the "setup networking"
section of the installer, it works. Likewise, if I issue the following
commands, again, _prior_ to
"setup networking" section of the installer (after a reboot), they
work, and networking does too:

ip address add 192.168.1.150 dev enp0s12f1
ip link set enp0s12f1 up
ip route add 192.168.1.0/24 dev enp0s12f1
ip route add 0/0 via 192.168.1.1
I can ping internet-facing ip@ from there.

So, networking worked well afterwards. If I repeat those commands
after the "setup networking"
section of the installer, the machine locks up again, with the same
error message on the console
(at the difference of the message time and "stuck for 23s" instead of "22s").

If I setup networking manually _prior_ to "setup networking", then
skip "setup networking" I'm able
to complete the installation of debian 9.0 with the provided iso; and
then use the system normally,
including the network stack of course.

Thank you Adrian for keeping this port alive.

+dmesg attached.
[0.46] PROMLIB: Sun IEEE Boot Prom 'OBP 4.17.1 2005/04/11 14:31'
[0.92] PROMLIB: Root node compatible: 
[0.000218] Linux version 4.14.0-3-sparc64 (debian-ker...@lists.debian.org) 
(gcc version 7.3.0 (Debian 7.3.0-3)) #1 Debian 4.14.17-1 (2018-02-14)
[0.064233] bootconsole [btext0] enabled
[0.065425] ARCH: SUN4U
[0.066588] Ethernet address: 08:00:20:c8:f4:a7
[0.067835] MM: PAGE_OFFSET is 0xf800 (max_phys_bits == 40)
[0.069201] MM: VMALLOC [0x0001 --> 0x0600]
[0.070544] MM: VMEMMAP [0x0600 --> 0x0c00]
[0.133227] Kernel: Using 3 locked TLB entries for main kernel image.
[0.134643] Remapping the kernel... 
[0.135304] done.
[0.382297] OF stdout device is: /pci@1f,0/SUNW,m64B@13
[0.383583] PROM: Built device tree with 84779 bytes of memory.
[0.385158] Top of RAM: 0xdfdf, Total RAM: 0x7fde
[0.386447] Memory hole size: 1536MB
[1.084592] Allocated 16384 bytes for kernel page tables.
[1.086457] Zone ranges:
[1.087566]   Normal   [mem 0x-0xdfde]
[1.088910] Movable zone start for each node
[1.090117] Early memory node ranges
[1.091281]   node   0: [mem 0x-0x1fff]
[1.092628]   node   0: [mem 0x4000-0x5fff]
[1.093971]   node   0: [mem 0x8000-0x9fff]
[1.095315]   node   0: [mem 0xc000-0xdeffdfff]
[1.096662]   node   0: [mem 0xdf00-0xdfdd9fff]
[1.098005]   node   0: [mem 0xdfde8000-0xdfde]
[1.099355] Initmem setup node 0 [mem 0x-0xdfde]
[1.100760] On node 0 totalpages: 261872
[1.100771]   Normal zone: 2302 pages used for memmap
[1.100776]   Normal zone: 0 pages reserved
[1.100782]   Normal zone: 261872 pages, LIFO batch:15
[1.281935] Booting Linux...
[1.283099] CPU CAPS: [flush,stbar,swap,muldiv,v9,mul32,div32,v8plus]
[1.284486] CPU CAPS: [vis]
[1.290053] pcpu-alloc: s0 r0 d32768 u32768 alloc=1*32768
[1.290064] pcpu-alloc: [0] 0 
[1.291599] Built 1 zonelists, mobility grouping on.  Total pages: 259570
[1.292987] Kernel command line: root=/dev/sda1 ro
[1.299302] PID hash table entries: 4096 (order: 2, 32768 bytes)
[1.312545] Dentry cache hash table entries: 262144 (order: 8, 2097152 bytes)
[1.320249] Inode-cache hash table entries: 131072 (order: 7, 1048576 bytes)
[1.321674] Sorting __ex_table...
[1.456909] Memory: 2023168K/2094976K available (6040K kernel code, 744K 
rwdata, 1664K rodata, 464K init, 398K bss, 71808K reserved, 0K cma-reserved)
[1.458860] random: get_random_u32 called from 
cache_alloc_refill+0x260/0xb40 with crng_init=0
[1.460797] ftrace: allocating 20952 entries in 41 pages
[1.527844] NR_IRQS: 2048, nr_irqs: 2048, preallocated irqs: 1
[1.529408] clocksource: hbtick: mask: 0x max_cycles: 
0x148020aa9, max_idle_ns: 440795202069 ns
[1.531019] clocksource: mult[b400012e] shift[24]
[1.532259] clockevent: mult[16c16bf] shift[32]
[1.534294] Console: colour dummy device 80x25
[1.535524] console [tty0] enabled
[1.536685] bootconsole [btext0] disabled
[1.618003] Calibrating delay using timer specific routine.. 11.13 BogoMIPS 
(lpj=22275)
[1.618032] pid_max: default: 32768 minimum: 301
[1.618582] Security Framework initialized
[