🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.sys.intel
Article #1593

Re: Intel 286/310's

#1593
From: Chuck McManis
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1987 18:17
44 lines
2862 bytes
In article <1910@a.cs.okstate.edu>, rjs@a.cs.okstate.edu (Roland Stolfa) writes:
> Hello,
> 
> Several weeks ago, I submitted a letter about some Intel 286/310 boxes that
> I was having problems with.  I wish to thank all those who answered my plea.
> I am, however, still having problems.  Therefore, I would like restate the
> problems that I am having, hoping that one of you in netland can help me out
> some more...
> 
> Here at Oklahoma State University, we have 6 Intel 286/310's running
> Xenix 3.0 (that's right 3.0) Update 1, with OpenNet 1.0 Update 1.
> Each of the 310's has a 40M drive, 1M of memory (this is a correction),
> and one iSBC 188/48 Version 1.1.

I assume you also have a 186/51 ethernet board ? 

> ... When the load reaches about 20 students (usually just before an 
> assignment is due :-) the system seems to handle everything just fine.
> However, after the system has sustained this for a "while", one machine 
> in the set will lock up... 
> ... When I try to fix the situation, I plug a terminal into the console 
> port on machine B, and it just sits there.  No response to <CR>, <DEL>, etc.

First, the question comes to mind "Why isn't there a terminal *always* plugged
into the console port?" You may have missed a message like "panic: interrupt"
or something. But since you obviously don't, you can check to see if the
kernel has paniced by jumping into the debug monitor. (To enable the monitor
you build the kernel with the line "debug	1" in the xenix.conf file.)
Push the "I" button on the front panel and single step along until you get
out of the debug interrupt routine. Is the machine looping on a 'Halt' 
instruction? If so your kernel probably died. If not then the only other
problem could be that it called 'sleep' in the ethernet driver and missed
the wakeup interrupt. If that is the case the statement(s) after the halt
instruction will check to see which interrupt broke the machine out of the
interrupt and basically check for the sleep condition. 

> Roland J. Stolfa
> Department of Computing and Information Sciences


-- 
--Chuck McManis
uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis   BIX: cmcmanis  ARPAnet: cmcmanis@sun.com
These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you.
Technical Details
Message-ID: <17153@sun.uucp>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!columbia!rutgers!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!decvax!decwrl!sun!cmcmanis
References: <1910@a.cs.okstate.edu>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!columbia!rutgers!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!decvax!decwrl!sun!cmcmanis
From: cmcmanis@sun.uucp (Chuck McManis)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel,comp.unix.xenix
Subject: Re: Intel 286/310's
Message-ID: <17153@sun.uucp>
Date: Wed, 22-Apr-87 13:17:36 EST
Article-I.D.: sun.17153
Posted: Wed Apr 22 13:17:36 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 24-Apr-87 05:28:11 EST
References: <1910@a.cs.okstate.edu>
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. - Mtn View, CA
Lines: 44
Summary: Sound's like a missing interrupt