If it takes more than the proposed 5 secs, why bother -- your
system is dead anyway ;-)
Hmm.. ok.. I am being parnoid, I just don't trust the FW guys to
leave a processor off line that may suck :)
How SLOF make sure the processor is good? does it?
Only the service processor can completely s
On Aug 12, 2006, at 5:31 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
Note that the processors on a JS20 are noticably slower to handshake
than those on a JS21. I had to rid of the hard-coded 1024 timebase
ticks and replace it with calculating five seconds from the timebase
frequency, as the timeout logic wa
Note that the processors on a JS20 are noticably slower to handshake
than those on a JS21. I had to rid of the hard-coded 1024 timebase
ticks and replace it with calculating five seconds from the timebase
frequency, as the timeout logic was firing on my JS20 blade.
What should we do about CPUs
On Aug 10, 2006, at 10:09 PM, Amos Waterland wrote:
Take two.
ok, I think we need a take three...
Note that the processors on a JS20 are noticably slower to handshake
than those on a JS21. I had to rid of the hard-coded 1024 timebase
ticks and replace it with calculating five seconds from t
Take two.
Note that the processors on a JS20 are noticably slower to handshake
than those on a JS21. I had to rid of the hard-coded 1024 timebase
ticks and replace it with calculating five seconds from the timebase
frequency, as the timeout logic was firing on my JS20 blade.
Note that the SLOF i
