Hi all,
Now that we've replaced the faulty node in calxeda02, something else has happened. Namely, the mac addresses of the four nodes on that one card will be different. Can someone do an inspect of nodes 8, 9, 10 and 11 and give me the mac addresses so I can re-assign their ip addresses with dhcp?
Thanks
Dave
Dave Pigott dave.pigott@linaro.org writes:
Hi all,
Now that we've replaced the faulty node in calxeda02, something else has happened. Namely, the mac addresses of the four nodes on that one card will be different. Can someone do an inspect of nodes 8, 9, 10 and 11 and give me the mac addresses so I can re-assign their ip addresses with dhcp?
I think this is just this, right?
mwhudson@linaro-gateway:~$ cxmanage macaddrs calxeda02-00-02 Getting MAC addresses... 1 successes | 0 errors | 0 nodes left | .
MAC addresses from calxeda02-00-02 Node 0, Port 0: fc:2f:40:8a:b7:b4 Node 0, Port 1: fc:2f:40:8a:b7:b5 Node 0, Port 2: fc:2f:40:8a:b7:b6 Node 1, Port 0: fc:2f:40:17:da:28 Node 1, Port 1: fc:2f:40:17:da:29 Node 1, Port 2: fc:2f:40:17:da:2a Node 2, Port 0: fc:2f:40:08:7e:4c Node 2, Port 1: fc:2f:40:08:7e:4d Node 2, Port 2: fc:2f:40:08:7e:4e Node 3, Port 0: fc:2f:40:46:ba:c4 Node 3, Port 1: fc:2f:40:46:ba:c5 Node 3, Port 2: fc:2f:40:46:ba:c6 Node 4, Port 0: fc:2f:40:75:cf:bc Node 4, Port 1: fc:2f:40:75:cf:bd Node 4, Port 2: fc:2f:40:75:cf:be Node 5, Port 0: fc:2f:40:24:58:34 Node 5, Port 1: fc:2f:40:24:58:35 Node 5, Port 2: fc:2f:40:24:58:36 Node 6, Port 0: fc:2f:40:04:da:80 Node 6, Port 1: fc:2f:40:04:da:81 Node 6, Port 2: fc:2f:40:04:da:82 Node 7, Port 0: fc:2f:40:38:e6:44 Node 7, Port 1: fc:2f:40:38:e6:45 Node 7, Port 2: fc:2f:40:38:e6:46 Node 9, Port 0: fc:2f:40:aa:4c:58 Node 9, Port 1: fc:2f:40:aa:4c:59 Node 9, Port 2: fc:2f:40:aa:4c:5a Node 10, Port 0: fc:2f:40:3c:db:58 Node 10, Port 1: fc:2f:40:3c:db:59 Node 10, Port 2: fc:2f:40:3c:db:5a Node 12, Port 0: fc:2f:40:c1:c9:ac Node 12, Port 1: fc:2f:40:c1:c9:ad Node 12, Port 2: fc:2f:40:c1:c9:ae Node 13, Port 0: fc:2f:40:c5:4e:d0 Node 13, Port 1: fc:2f:40:c5:4e:d1 Node 13, Port 2: fc:2f:40:c5:4e:d2 Node 14, Port 0: fc:2f:40:d9:15:44 Node 14, Port 1: fc:2f:40:d9:15:45 Node 14, Port 2: fc:2f:40:d9:15:46 Node 15, Port 0: fc:2f:40:39:85:38 Node 15, Port 1: fc:2f:40:39:85:39 Node 15, Port 2: fc:2f:40:39:85:3a Node 16, Port 0: fc:2f:40:23:8f:84 Node 16, Port 1: fc:2f:40:23:8f:85 Node 16, Port 2: fc:2f:40:23:8f:86 Node 17, Port 0: fc:2f:40:4a:d1:60 Node 17, Port 1: fc:2f:40:4a:d1:61 Node 17, Port 2: fc:2f:40:4a:d1:62 Node 18, Port 0: fc:2f:40:9a:09:8c Node 18, Port 1: fc:2f:40:9a:09:8d Node 18, Port 2: fc:2f:40:9a:09:8e Node 19, Port 0: fc:2f:40:c6:9a:70 Node 19, Port 1: fc:2f:40:c6:9a:71 Node 19, Port 2: fc:2f:40:c6:9a:72 Node 20, Port 0: fc:2f:40:77:90:6c Node 20, Port 1: fc:2f:40:77:90:6d Node 20, Port 2: fc:2f:40:77:90:6e Node 21, Port 0: fc:2f:40:b2:92:74 Node 21, Port 1: fc:2f:40:b2:92:75 Node 21, Port 2: fc:2f:40:b2:92:76 Node 22, Port 0: fc:2f:40:ca:5d:bc Node 22, Port 1: fc:2f:40:ca:5d:bd Node 22, Port 2: fc:2f:40:ca:5d:be Node 23, Port 0: fc:2f:40:11:11:38 Node 23, Port 1: fc:2f:40:11:11:39 Node 23, Port 2: fc:2f:40:11:11:3a
Cheers, mwh
Dave,
I notice that nodes 11-15 inclusive seem to have disappeared from the calxeda02 box:
matthew-gretton-dann@linaro-gateway:~$ cxmanage ipinfo 192.168.2.75Getting IP addresses... 1 successes | 0 errors | 0 nodes left | .
IP info from 192.168.2.75 Node 0: 192.168.2.75 Node 1: 192.168.2.78 Node 2: 192.168.2.81 Node 3: 192.168.2.84 Node 4: 192.168.2.87 Node 5: 192.168.2.90 Node 6: 192.168.2.93 Node 7: 192.168.2.96 Node 9: 192.168.1.215 Node 10: 192.168.68.153 Node 16: 192.168.1.111 Node 17: 192.168.2.126 Node 18: 192.168.2.129 Node 19: 192.168.2.132 Node 20: 192.168.2.135 Node 21: 192.168.2.138 Node 22: 192.168.2.141 Node 23: 192.168.2.144
Can this be fixed please?
Thanks,
Matt
On 04/06/13 15:34, Dave Pigott wrote:
Hi all,
Now that we've replaced the faulty node in calxeda02, something else has happened. Namely, the mac addresses of the four nodes on that one card will be different. Can someone do an inspect of nodes 8, 9, 10 and 11 and give me the mac addresses so I can re-assign their ip addresses with dhcp?
Thanks
Dave
On 4 June 2013 21:45, Matthew Gretton-Dann matthew.gretton-dann@linaro.orgwrote:
Dave,
I notice that nodes 11-15 inclusive seem to have disappeared from the calxeda02 box:
Dave installed a new node and some of them need re-configuring. But I'm still running the LLVM release and would love if I could have a few more hours before someone touches the server. We know how sensitive it is and I already ran it three times today.
I'll let you guys know when I'm done with the release, so you can update the configuration.
Thanks, --renato
On 4 June 2013 21:47, Renato Golin renato.golin@linaro.org wrote:
I'll let you guys know when I'm done with the release, so you can update the configuration.
I'm done! Thanks for waiting, feel free to upgrade whatever. ;)
cheers, --renato
Something very odd here, post the broken node replacement. Matt and I are investigating and need exclusive access today, because we need to power cycle it, probably more than once.
Thanks
Dave
On 4 Jun 2013, at 21:45, Matthew Gretton-Dann matthew.gretton-dann@linaro.org wrote:
Node 16: 192.168.1.111 Node 17: 192.168.2.126
OK - so we've double checked and re-seated the boards and done some diagnostics. We've found the following:
* On the new board, which contains nodes 8, 9, 10 and 11, only 9 and 10 consistently come up and get served an ip address based on their MAC address. Nodes 8 and 11 don't always show up when trying to probe MAC addresses.
* Nodes 12, 13, 14 and 15 are showing up on a macaddr lookup consistently, but only sometimes being served an ip address.
* If we probe nodes in the 12-15 range, it sometimes brings them to life.
So, conclusions:
* The new board has only 2 nodes that work consistently * The board with nodes 12->15 is not behaving.
On a side note, we've noticed that several nodes don't consistently get served, but the ones detailed are the worst offenders.
Not totally sure where to go from here.
Dave
On 5 Jun 2013, at 09:57, Dave Pigott dave.pigott@linaro.org wrote:
Something very odd here, post the broken node replacement. Matt and I are investigating and need exclusive access today, because we need to power cycle it, probably more than once.
Thanks
Dave
On 4 Jun 2013, at 21:45, Matthew Gretton-Dann matthew.gretton-dann@linaro.org wrote:
Node 16: 192.168.1.111 Node 17: 192.168.2.126
https://jira.calxeda.com/browse/LINARO-1
Back to Calxeda and ask their input. For the record, in the same ticket Chris Oakley from Calxeda who's following this case had requested that we arrange a chat with him to coordinate the swap out and walk through FW upgrade after, did that chat take place?
Best regards,
-- Ilias Biris - ilias.biris@linaro.org Technical Program Manager, Linaro M: +358504839608, IRC: ibiris, Skype: ilias_biris Linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs
On 5 June 2013 13:10, Dave Pigott dave.pigott@linaro.org wrote:
OK - so we've double checked and re-seated the boards and done some diagnostics. We've found the following:
- On the new board, which contains nodes 8, 9, 10 and 11, only 9 and 10
consistently come up and get served an ip address based on their MAC address. Nodes 8 and 11 don't always show up when trying to probe MAC addresses.
- Nodes 12, 13, 14 and 15 are showing up on a macaddr lookup consistently,
but only sometimes being served an ip address.
- If we probe nodes in the 12-15 range, it sometimes brings them to life.
So, conclusions:
- The new board has only 2 nodes that work consistently
- The board with nodes 12->15 is not behaving.
On a side note, we've noticed that several nodes don't consistently get served, but the ones detailed are the worst offenders.
Not totally sure where to go from here.
Dave
On 5 Jun 2013, at 09:57, Dave Pigott dave.pigott@linaro.org wrote:
Something very odd here, post the broken node replacement. Matt and I are investigating and need exclusive access today, because we need to power cycle it, probably more than once.
Thanks
Dave
On 4 Jun 2013, at 21:45, Matthew Gretton-Dann < matthew.gretton-dann@linaro.org> wrote:
Node 16: 192.168.1.111 Node 17: 192.168.2.126
No, we just swapped the hardware out. We have a diagram of the node/slot layout as a guide.
Dave
On 5 Jun 2013, at 11:16, Ilias Biris ilias.biris@linaro.org wrote:
https://jira.calxeda.com/browse/LINARO-1
Back to Calxeda and ask their input. For the record, in the same ticket Chris Oakley from Calxeda who's following this case had requested that we arrange a chat with him to coordinate the swap out and walk through FW upgrade after, did that chat take place?
Best regards,
-- Ilias Biris - ilias.biris@linaro.org Technical Program Manager, Linaro M: +358504839608, IRC: ibiris, Skype: ilias_biris Linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs
On 5 June 2013 13:10, Dave Pigott dave.pigott@linaro.org wrote: OK - so we've double checked and re-seated the boards and done some diagnostics. We've found the following:
On the new board, which contains nodes 8, 9, 10 and 11, only 9 and 10 consistently come up and get served an ip address based on their MAC address. Nodes 8 and 11 don't always show up when trying to probe MAC addresses.
Nodes 12, 13, 14 and 15 are showing up on a macaddr lookup consistently, but only sometimes being served an ip address.
If we probe nodes in the 12-15 range, it sometimes brings them to life.
So, conclusions:
- The new board has only 2 nodes that work consistently
- The board with nodes 12->15 is not behaving.
On a side note, we've noticed that several nodes don't consistently get served, but the ones detailed are the worst offenders.
Not totally sure where to go from here.
Dave
On 5 Jun 2013, at 09:57, Dave Pigott dave.pigott@linaro.org wrote:
Something very odd here, post the broken node replacement. Matt and I are investigating and need exclusive access today, because we need to power cycle it, probably more than once.
Thanks
Dave
On 4 Jun 2013, at 21:45, Matthew Gretton-Dann matthew.gretton-dann@linaro.org wrote:
Node 16: 192.168.1.111 Node 17: 192.168.2.126
Hi Dave
thanks for the clarification. Could you get in touch with chris.oakley@calxeda.com directly and describe what is the issue you are experiencing?
Thanks, Ilias
-- Ilias Biris - ilias.biris@linaro.org Technical Program Manager, Linaro M: +358504839608, IRC: ibiris, Skype: ilias_biris Linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs
On 5 June 2013 13:35, Dave Pigott dave.pigott@linaro.org wrote:
No, we just swapped the hardware out. We have a diagram of the node/slot layout as a guide.
Dave
On 5 Jun 2013, at 11:16, Ilias Biris ilias.biris@linaro.org wrote:
https://jira.calxeda.com/browse/LINARO-1
Back to Calxeda and ask their input. For the record, in the same ticket Chris Oakley from Calxeda who's following this case had requested that we arrange a chat with him to coordinate the swap out and walk through FW upgrade after, did that chat take place?
Best regards,
-- Ilias Biris - ilias.biris@linaro.org Technical Program Manager, Linaro M: +358504839608, IRC: ibiris, Skype: ilias_biris Linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs
On 5 June 2013 13:10, Dave Pigott dave.pigott@linaro.org wrote:
OK - so we've double checked and re-seated the boards and done some diagnostics. We've found the following:
- On the new board, which contains nodes 8, 9, 10 and 11, only 9 and 10
consistently come up and get served an ip address based on their MAC address. Nodes 8 and 11 don't always show up when trying to probe MAC addresses.
- Nodes 12, 13, 14 and 15 are showing up on a macaddr lookup
consistently, but only sometimes being served an ip address.
- If we probe nodes in the 12-15 range, it sometimes brings them to life.
So, conclusions:
- The new board has only 2 nodes that work consistently
- The board with nodes 12->15 is not behaving.
On a side note, we've noticed that several nodes don't consistently get served, but the ones detailed are the worst offenders.
Not totally sure where to go from here.
Dave
On 5 Jun 2013, at 09:57, Dave Pigott dave.pigott@linaro.org wrote:
Something very odd here, post the broken node replacement. Matt and I are investigating and need exclusive access today, because we need to power cycle it, probably more than once.
Thanks
Dave
On 4 Jun 2013, at 21:45, Matthew Gretton-Dann < matthew.gretton-dann@linaro.org> wrote:
Node 16: 192.168.1.111 Node 17: 192.168.2.126
linaro-validation@lists.linaro.org