this is what i do as well. the initial download is a few minutes, but after
that it's never a problem over epics (i.e. flashburner application).
----- Original Message -----
From: John Dobbins <[email protected]>
Date: Tuesday, February 15, 2011 7:00 pm
Subject: Re: Arcturus uCDimm + TFTP
To: Eric Norum <[email protected]>
Cc: EPICS Tech Talk <[email protected]>
> On 2/15/2011 4:13 PM, Eric Norum wrote:
> > The problem is that the network stack provided by the uCDIMM
> bootstrap has a *very* small receive queue. If you have any
> significant broadcast traffic on the network segment you'll start
> losing TFTP packets resulting in massive slowdowns.
> >
> > Possible workarounds:
> > 1) Burn your first application into the ColdFire using TFTP on a
> quiet network segment -- I did this by connecting the ColdFire
> directly to my laptop -- with only two device on the network the TFTP
> transfers run very fast.
>
> That is just what I did to get around this.
>
>
> > 2) From then on use the EPICS flash memory driver to update your
> application. The RTEMS network stack is much more robust and doesn't
> drop packets so easily.
>
> I don't know about this EPICS flash memory driver. Is there something
> I
> should have read?
>
> Thanks,
>
> John Dobbins
>
>
>
>
>
> > What's really annoying is that the bad behaviour could be fixed
> with a small change in the bootstrap code -- once TFTP has begun, turn
> off reception of broadcast packets in the network hardware then turn
> reception back on when the TFTP command is terminated. This would
> completely fix the problem while still allowing RARP/etc. to continue
> to work. I suggested this to Arcturus several times, but they
> clearly haven't fixed things yet.
> >
> >
> > On Feb 15, 2011, at 1:01 PM, John Dobbins wrote:
> >
> >> Hello All,
> >>
> >> I have just built EPICS base and an example IOC for an
> RTEMS-uC5252 target (EPICS R3.14.11, RTEMS 3.9.3), which I can say
> went swimmingly well. However tftp problems are sucking all the fun
> out of it. The Arcturus uCDimm comes with a TFTP server which I am
> using with a 255.255.0.0 netmask. File transfer takes forever and
> usually ends in a time-out error. We have some evidence that things
> work much better on a subnet with a 255.255.255.0 mask. Can anyone
> shed light on any of this?
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> John Dobbins
> >>
> >> Cornell University
> >
>
>
- References:
- Arcturus uCDimm + TFTP John Dobbins
- Re: Arcturus uCDimm + TFTP Eric Norum
- Re: Arcturus uCDimm + TFTP John Dobbins
- Navigate by Date:
- Prev:
Re: Arcturus uCDimm + TFTP John Dobbins
- Next:
Re: no envPaths in application of base 3.14.11 Mi Qingru
- Index:
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
<2011>
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
- Navigate by Thread:
- Prev:
Re: Arcturus uCDimm + TFTP John Dobbins
- Next:
Re: Arcturus uCDimm + TFTP Eric Norum
- Index:
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
<2011>
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
|