Yes, that's  a different chip version than what we have.  You can contact 
Pronto/Pica8 about this, probably by way of the reseller that you received the 
box from. 

-Dan




On Monday, May 7, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Xuan-Nam Nguyen wrote:

> Hi Dan,
> 
> The information of our switch ASIC: 
> 
> PCI unit 0: Dev 0xb538, Rev 0x11, Chip BCM56538_B0, Driver BCM56634_B0
> 
> It seems our chip is older than yours (BCM56538 < BCM56634)
> May be it is the reason ?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Nam
> 
> > From: "Dan Talayco" <dtala...@stanford.edu (mailto:dtala...@stanford.edu)>
> > To: "NGUYEN Xuan Nam" <xuan-nam.ngu...@inria.fr 
> > (mailto:xuan-nam.ngu...@inria.fr)>
> > Cc: "Dan Talayco at gmail" <dan.tala...@gmail.com 
> > (mailto:dan.tala...@gmail.com)>, "Damien Saucez" <damien.sau...@inria.fr 
> > (mailto:damien.sau...@inria.fr)>, openflow-discuss@lists.stanford.edu 
> > (mailto:openflow-discuss@lists.stanford.edu)
> > Sent: Friday, May 4, 2012 6:44:18 PM
> > Subject: Re: [openflow-discuss] Pronto 3290 max flow entries ?
> > 
> > Glad to hear that part worked anyway.   
> > 
> > The information we need is about the actual Broadcom ASIC inside the box.  
> > If this information appears, it will be very late in the output during 
> > initialization.  
> > 
> > If you do 'cd /local/logs' and do 'less ofswd.log' you should see a line 
> > like:  
> > 
> > PCI unit 0: Dev 0xb634, Rev 0x11, Chip BCM56634_B0, Driver BCM56634_B0
> > 
> > towards the top.
> > 
> > -Dan
> > 
> > 
> > On Friday, May 4, 2012 at 12:44 AM, NGUYEN Xuan Nam wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi Dan,
> > > 
> > > I change the host parameter as you suggested and it works !!!
> > > 
> > > Back to first question about max flow entries, 
> > > I ran the test below and used the Web UI to see the number of flow 
> > > entries :
> > > + FillTableExact : 1920 (flow entries) 
> > > + FillTableWc : 1919 (flow entries)
> > > 
> > > Here is the HW information about our Pronto switch 3290
> > > 
> > > CPU:   8541, Version: 1.1, (0x80720011)
> > > Core:  E500, Version: 2.0, (0x80200020)
> > > Clock Configuration:
> > >        CPU: 825 MHz, CCB: 330 MHz,
> > >        DDR: 165 MHz, LBC:  41 MHz
> > > L1:    D-cache 32 kB enabled
> > >        I-cache 32 kB enabled
> > > I2C:   ready
> > > DRAM:  Initializing
> > >     DDR: 512 MB
> > > FLASH: 32 MB
> > > L2 cache 256KB: enabled
> > > Set ethaddr MAC address = e8:9a:8f:fb:c3:fc
> > > Set eth1addr MAC address = e8:9a:8f:fb:c3:fd
> > > In:    serial
> > > Out:   serial
> > > Err:   serial
> > > Net:   TSEC0, TSEC1
> > > IDE:   Bus 0: OK 
> > >   Device 0: Model: 2GB CompactFlash Card Firm: CF B612D Ser#: 
> > > C321102416A10v4B618j
> > >             Type: Hard Disk
> > >             Capacity: 1953.9 MB = 1.9 GB (4001760 x 512)
> > > 
> > > Could you compare with your switch ? Thanks 
> > > 
> > > Nam
> > > 
> > > On 05/03/2012 05:57 PM, Dan Talayco at gmail wrote: 
> > > > Oops, wait.  I misread the subject. 
> > > > 
> > > > If you are trying to connect to a 3290, you can't specify 
> > > > --host=127.0.0.1 (that would be trying to connect to a vswitch running 
> > > > on the local host. 
> > > > 
> > > > Assuming you're talking to the 3290 over an interface with the IP 
> > > > address 192.168.1.1(for example) you would use that: 
> > > > 
> > > > sudo ./oft --host=192.168.1.1 --port=6634 --verbose --test-spec=Echo 
> > > > --platform=remote 
> > > > 
> > > > The remote platform doesn't really matter if you're not using data 
> > > > plane tests.  Again, this assumes your 3290 is trying to talk to a 
> > > > controller at 192.168.1.1 at port 6634.  Note that no other controller 
> > > > should be running on the same host. 
> > > > 
> > > > -Dan 
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > openflow-discuss mailing list
> > > openflow-discuss@lists.stanford.edu 
> > > (mailto:openflow-discuss@lists.stanford.edu)
> > > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/openflow-discuss
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> openflow-discuss mailing list
> openflow-discuss@lists.stanford.edu 
> (mailto:openflow-discuss@lists.stanford.edu)
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/openflow-discuss
> 
> 


_______________________________________________
openflow-discuss mailing list
openflow-discuss@lists.stanford.edu
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/openflow-discuss

Reply via email to