[pfSense Support] problem with 2.0BETA[34] and usb

2010-08-03 Thread Nenhum_de_Nos 
hail,

I have Linksys USB200M working for some time on 1.2.3R, and now I'm
testing 2.0 BETA. I got my unit to run BETA3 and got this error:

da0:  Removable Direct Access SCSI-2 device
da0: 1.000MB/s transfers
da0: Attempt to query device size failed: NOT READY, Medium not present
usbd_req_re_enumerate: addr=2, set address failed! (USB_ERR_TIMEOUT, ignored)
usbd_req_re_enumerate: getting device descriptor at addr 2 failed,
USB_ERR_TIMEO 
   UT
usbd_req_re_enumerate: addr=2, set address failed! (USB_ERR_TIMEOUT, ignored)
usbd_req_re_enumerate: getting device descriptor at addr 2 failed,
USB_ERR_TIMEO 
   UT
usb_alloc_device: Failure selecting configuration index 0:USB_ERR_TIMEOUT,
port  
   2, addr 2 (ignored)
ugen1.2:  at usbus1
vr0: link state changed to DOWN
ugen1.2:  at usbus1 (disconnected)
usb_alloc_device: set address 2 failed (USB_ERR_TIMEOUT, ignored)
usb_alloc_device: getting device descriptor at addr 2 failed, USB_ERR_TIMEOUT
usbd_req_re_enumerate: addr=2, set address failed! (USB_ERR_TIMEOUT, ignored)
usbd_req_re_enumerate: getting device descriptor at addr 2 failed,
USB_ERR_TIMEO 
   UT
usbd_req_re_enumerate: addr=2, set address failed! (USB_ERR_TIMEOUT, ignored)
usbd_req_re_enumerate: getting device descriptor at addr 2 failed,
USB_ERR_TIMEO 
   UT
ugen1.2: <(null)> at usbus1 (disconnected)
uhub_reattach_port: could not allocate new device
usb_alloc_device: set address 2 failed (USB_ERR_TIMEOUT, ignored)
usb_alloc_device: getting device descriptor at addr 2 failed, USB_ERR_TIMEOUT
usbd_req_re_enumerate: addr=2, set address failed! (USB_ERR_TIMEOUT, ignored)
usbd_req_re_enumerate: getting device descriptor at addr 2 failed,
USB_ERR_TIMEO 
   UT
usbd_req_re_enumerate: addr=2, set address failed! (USB_ERR_TIMEOUT, ignored)
usbd_req_re_enumerate: getting device descriptor at addr 2 failed,
USB_ERR_TIMEO 
   UT
ugen1.2: <(null)> at usbus1 (disconnected)
uhub_reattach_port: could not allocate new device
vr0: link state changed to UP
[2.0-beta4][ad...@pfsense.localdomain]/root(2):

so, I then decided to update to BETA4 and as you can see the same issue
happens. I imagine this is something for the FreeBSD part, then the
pfSense, but I had the same NIC running on 8.1R on same hardware and no
problem. so asking here first.

by the way, this unit has 4 usb ports, and this one where the usb nic is
and the one above it are useless until a reboot is issued. using the one
above the 3G modem is fine with the keyboard:

ugen0.1:  at usbus0, cfg=0 md=HOST spd=FULL (12Mbps)
pwr=ON
ugen1.1:  at usbus1, cfg=0 md=HOST spd=FULL (12Mbps)
pwr=ON
ugen2.1:  at usbus2, cfg=0 md=HOST spd=HIGH (480Mbps)
pwr=ON
ugen0.2:  at usbus0, cfg=0 md=HOST
spd=FULL (12Mbps) pwr=ON
ugen0.3:  at usbus0, cfg=0
md=HOST spd=LOW (1.5Mbps) pwr=ON

and using the nic there gets me the same error as above. after trying the
usb nic on the port above the 3G modem, the keyboard is useless on it,
returning me the same above error.

all tests now are on BETA4. anyone has any clue ?

this is a via mini itx crusoe based mobo.

thanks,

matheus


-- 
We will call you cygnus,
The God of balance you shall be

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style


-- 
We will call you cygnus,
The God of balance you shall be

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org

Re: [pfSense Support] PFSENSE 2.0

2010-08-03 Thread Eugen Leitl 
On Tue, Aug 03, 2010 at 09:22:41AM -0500, Karl Fife wrote:

> We're going to build up just such a system in just a few months after we 
> close a couple of open projects.  Has anyone done this already, & have 
> experience to share?

I'm running 3 pfSense full installation on flash/SSDs.

One is an ALIX system with SLC CF flash, one is a SuperMicro
Atom rackmount with 4 (or 8?) SLC Transcend SSD, and one uses
Intel 80 GByte 2nd gen SSD. No issues so far.

P.S. I'm watching 
http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Is_there_IPv6_support_available 
as of today I have native IPv6 support now. Yay!

-- 
Eugen* Leitl http://leitl.org";>leitl http://leitl.org
__
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org

Re: [pfSense Support] PFSENSE 2.0

2010-08-03 Thread Karl Fife 
If you want to run the full version on embedded, there are lots of SSD's 
these days with wear-leveling subsystems to address the "write endurance" 
issue of nand flash memory.  Some SSD's (such as Intel's newest SSD family) 
even take it a step further by adding extra blocks to swap out when a block 
becomes exhausted.  Intel's version apparently also does something like 
S.M.A.R.T., but instead of monitoring the length and growth rate of the 
master defect table, the SSD equivalent of SMART instead monitors the pool 
of spares and can inform the OS when a disk failure is in approaching.  Many 
of us have hard-won experience indicating that SMART is pretty crappy 
(because growth characteristics of the master defect table are in fact only 
loosely correlated with actual disk failure), but I suspect that the SSD 
equivalent will provide a reliable prediction.


I tend to think we're at the dawn of a new era in storage.  With SSD's & 
low-power fanless ITX systems, it seems like the line between 'full' and 
'embedded' is becoming a bit fuzzy.


We're going to build up just such a system in just a few months after we 
close a couple of open projects.  Has anyone done this already, & have 
experience to share?


-Karl



- Original Message - 
From: "Chris Buechler" 

To: 
Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 10:17 PM
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] PFSENSE 2.0


On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 11:10 PM, Jeppe Øland  wrote:

On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 7:47 AM, Vick Khera  wrote:
none of the devices on which I run embedded even *have* VGA, so I 
disagree.

If you have a full system, just run the full release.


I know the embedded version tries to write as little as possible on
the drive in order to increase the longevity of CF cards etc.
Does the full version do this?


No, it's not relevant on hard drives.


In other words, *don't* run the full version on embedded hardware :-)



Some people do, I know of systems running full installs on CF for
years with no trouble (I also know of people killing the CF in a
matter of months). If you care about the life of your CF, yeah I
wouldn't recommend it. I would never do it on a critical system.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: support-unsubscr...@pfsense.com
For additional commands, e-mail: support-h...@pfsense.com

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org