128 MB instead of 256 MB RAM?

fvdw
Posts: 777
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: 128 MB instead of 256 MB RAM?

Post by fvdw » Mon Nov 28, 2011 8:22 pm

yes I tried booting the classic using the original disk from the lite, and the classic boots just fine from that disk and identifies as a networkspace 2. Indeed it seems that in they updated the kernel to support both

ps I also made my 2.6.39.4 doing that. I added a setup file in mach kirkwood for the Lite version and added the choice for nwsp2 lite in the config menu. As they have each their own mach number it works. Think lacie uses the same approach.

In case they would have used the same mach number for Lite and classic then you would need dedicate kernels.

Looking to the vanilla kernel all other kirkwood devices form Marvell are supported (not yet the Lite) and all have different mach number. Guess they make one kernel that seves all.
PS Please note that the setup file for the nwsp2 in the vanilla kernel lacks the support for back side usb port. The Lite setup file is not a full copy of the nwsp, eth0 is different and also the leds setup. My kernel has all inside :mrgreen: seems I am ahead of the Lacie team :o

Mijzelf
Posts: 6224
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 10:45 am

Re: 128 MB instead of 256 MB RAM?

Post by Mijzelf » Mon Nov 28, 2011 8:56 pm

In that case I'll clean up the 'Howto install on a new disk' wiki page.
fvdw wrote:Guess they make one kernel that seves all.
Agree. From the kernel of the Lite:

Code: Select all

~$ strings kernel | grep -B 2 _v2
netspace_v2
inetspace_v2
netspace_max_v2
netspace_mini_v2
netspace_lite_v2
d2net_v2
net2big_v2
net4big_v2
3333
net5big_v2
33333333
wireless_space
seems I am ahead of the Lacie team
Yeah. But they have to polish up all those shiny boxes, before shipping. That will take a loooot of time. :lol:

math85
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2011 8:34 pm

Re: 128 MB instead of 256 MB RAM?

Post by math85 » Thu Dec 15, 2011 9:13 pm

Is this information from the Wiki correct?

Classic:
Processor : ARM926EJ-S rev 1 (v5l)

Lite:
Processor : Feroceon 88FR131 rev 1 (v5l)

I have a Lite, but my processor seems to be 'ARM926EJ-S'. The same is reported earlier in this topic. Is the wiki wrong here?

fvdw
Posts: 777
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: 128 MB instead of 256 MB RAM?

Post by fvdw » Thu Dec 15, 2011 9:39 pm

it depends where do look for info and which kernel you use, the output listed in the wiki is the output from the command cat /proc/cpuinfo and I think running my own kernel

below the output using dmesg command from a Lite running the original lacie kernel
All arm processors are based on 926 architecture to my knowledge.
More important to distinguish the difference is the Soc information, the chip where the arm processor is integrated in together with other the lite is uses Soc: MV88F6192, the classic a SoC MV88F6281 this is also visible on the marvel chip on the mainboard

Code: Select all

/ # dmesg
Linux version 2.6.22.18 (sbs@node5.lacie.com) (gcc version 4.2.1) #1 Wed Jul 13 13:46:08 UTC 2011
CPU: ARM926EJ-S [56251311] revision 1 (ARMv5TE), cr=00053177
Machine: netspace_lite_v2
Using UBoot passing parameters structure
Memory policy: ECC disabled, Data cache writeback
On node 0 totalpages: 32768
  DMA zone: 256 pages used for memmap
  DMA zone: 0 pages reserved
  DMA zone: 32512 pages, LIFO batch:7
  Normal zone: 0 pages used for memmap
CPU0: D VIVT write-back cache
CPU0: I cache: 16384 bytes, associativity 4, 32 byte lines, 128 sets
CPU0: D cache: 16384 bytes, associativity 4, 32 byte lines, 128 sets
Built 1 zonelists.  Total pages: 32512
Kernel command line: console=ttyS0,115200 root=/dev/sda7 ro reset=0 productType=ASTON_KW cap=gpt,lba64
PID hash table entries: 512 (order: 9, 2048 bytes)
Console: colour dummy device 80x30
Dentry cache hash table entries: 16384 (order: 4, 65536 bytes)
Inode-cache hash table entries: 8192 (order: 3, 32768 bytes)
Memory: 128MB 0MB 0MB 0MB = 128MB total
Memory: 126336KB available (2812K code, 208K data, 484K init)
Calibrating delay loop... 799.53 BogoMIPS (lpj=3997696)
Mount-cache hash table entries: 512
CPU: Testing write buffer coherency: ok
NET: Registered protocol family 16

CPU Interface
-------------
SDRAM_CS0 ....base 00000000, size 128MB
SDRAM_CS1 ....disable
SDRAM_CS2 ....disable
SDRAM_CS3 ....disable
PEX0_MEM ....base e8000000, size 128MB
PEX0_IO ....base f2000000, size   1MB
INTER_REGS ....base f1000000, size   1MB
NFLASH_CS ....base fa000000, size   2MB
SPI_CS ....base f4000000, size  16MB
BOOT_ROM_CS ....no such
DEV_BOOTCS ....no such
CRYPT_ENG ....base f0000000, size   2MB

  Marvell Development Board (LSP Version KW_LSP_4.2.7_patch2)-- netspace_lite_v2  Soc: MV88F6192 Rev 3 LE

 Detected Tclk 166666667 and SysClk 200000000
MV Buttons Device Load
Register Marvell USB EHCI Host controller #0
PEX0 interface detected no Link.
PCI: bus0: Fast back to back transfers enabled
SCSI subsystem initialized
NET: Registered protocol family 2
Time: kw_clocksource clocksource has been installed.
IP route cache hash table entries: 1024 (order: 0, 4096 bytes)
TCP established hash table entries: 4096 (order: 3, 32768 bytes)
TCP bind hash table entries: 4096 (order: 2, 16384 bytes)
TCP: Hash tables configured (established 4096 bind 4096)
TCP reno registered
Use the XOR engines (acceleration) for enhancing the following functions:
  o RAID 5 Xor calculation
  o kernel memcpy
  o kenrel memzero
Number of XOR engines to use: 4
cesadev_init(c000ef10)
MV Buttons Driver Load
mv_rtc mv_rtc: rtc core: registered mv_rtc as rtc0
mv_rtc mv_rtc: Kirkwood SoC RTC added
Init kirkwood cpufreq driver
gpio-hd-power gpio-hd-power: GPIO Hard Disk power device initialized
gpio-usb gpio-usb: USB GPIO's initialized
Registered led device: ns_lite:blue:front
VFS: Disk quotas dquot_6.5.1
Dquot-cache hash table entries: 1024 (order 0, 4096 bytes)
Registering unionfs 2.5.3 (for 2.6.22.19)
io scheduler noop registered
io scheduler anticipatory registered (default)
io scheduler deadline registered
io scheduler cfq registered
Serial: 8250/16550 driver $Revision: 1.90 $ 4 ports, IRQ sharing disabled
serial8250.0: ttyS0 at MMIO 0xf1012000 (irq = 33) is a 16550A
serial8250.0: ttyS1 at MMIO 0xf1012100 (irq = 34) is a 16550A
INIT Marvell Ethernet Driver: mv_netdev
Loading Marvell Ethernet Driver:
  o Cached descriptors in DRAM
  o DRAM SW cache-coherency
  o Multi RX Queue support - 4 RX queues
  o Multi TX Queue support - 2 TX Queues
  o TCP segmentation offload enabled
  o Receive checksum offload enabled
  o Transmit checksum offload enabled
  o Network Fast Processing (Routing) supported
  o Driver ERROR statistics enabled
  o Driver INFO statistics enabled
  o Proc tool API enabled
  o Rx descripors: q0=128 q1=128 q2=128 q3=128
  o Tx descripors: q0=532 q1=532
  o Loading network interface(s):
    o eth0, ifindex = 1, GbE port = 0

Warning: Giga 1 is Powered Off

mvFpRuleDb (c7c45000): 1024 entries, 4096 bytes
Integrated Sata device found
scsi0 : Marvell SCSI to SATA adapter
scsi1 : Marvell SCSI to SATA adapter
scsi 0:0:0:0: Direct-Access     Hitachi  HDP725050GLA360  GM4O PQ: 0 ANSI: 5
Disk topology: host_no=0 channel=0 id=0
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] 976773168 512-byte hardware sectors (500108 MB)
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Write Protect is off
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Mode Sense: 23 00 10 00
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, supports DPO and FUA
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] 976773168 512-byte hardware sectors (500108 MB)
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Write Protect is off
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Mode Sense: 23 00 10 00
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, supports DPO and FUA
 sda: sda1 sda2 sda3 sda4 < sda5 sda6 sda7 sda8 >
sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Attached SCSI disk
sd 0:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg0 type 0
SPI Serial flash detected @ 0xf4000000, 512KB (128sec x 4KB)
mice: PS/2 mouse device common for all mice
input: gpio-keys as /class/input/input0
i2c /dev entries driver
at24 0-0050: 512 byte 24c04 EEPROM (writable)
md: linear personality registered for level -1
md: raid0 personality registered for level 0
md: raid1 personality registered for level 1
md: raid10 personality registered for level 10
raid6: int32x1     73 MB/s
raid6: int32x2     80 MB/s
raid6: int32x4     83 MB/s
raid6: int32x8     75 MB/s
raid6: using algorithm int32x4 (83 MB/s)
md: raid6 personality registered for level 6
md: raid5 personality registered for level 5
md: raid4 personality registered for level 4
raid5: measuring checksumming speed
   arm4regs  :   726.400 MB/sec
   8regs     :   506.000 MB/sec
   32regs    :   603.200 MB/sec
raid5: using function: arm4regs (726.400 MB/sec)
device-mapper: ioctl: 4.11.0-ioctl (2006-10-12) initialised: dm-devel@redhat.com
Registered led device: ns_lite:red:front
TCP cubic registered
NET: Registered protocol family 1
NET: Registered protocol family 17
Freeing init memory: 484K

math85
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2011 8:34 pm

Re: 128 MB instead of 256 MB RAM?

Post by math85 » Thu Dec 15, 2011 10:13 pm

I updated the cpuinfo for the lite on the wiki, as the default kernel gives different information. The old wiki page suggested that lite and classic had a different CPU, but this difference seems too be mainly caused by different kernel versions used to display cpuinfo.

fvdw
Posts: 777
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: 128 MB instead of 256 MB RAM?

Post by fvdw » Thu Dec 15, 2011 10:28 pm

math85 wrote:I updated the cpuinfo for the lite on the wiki, as the default kernel gives different information. The old wiki page suggested that lite and classic had a different CPU, but this difference seems too be mainly caused by different kernel versions used to display cpuinfo.
thks math85 this was indeed confusing, now its much better

math85
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2011 8:34 pm

Re: 128 MB instead of 256 MB RAM?

Post by math85 » Sun Dec 18, 2011 10:15 pm

Would any information regarding the version be obtainable from the serial number and other information on the box?

My Network Space 2 Lite has a sticker on the box with the following information:

UPC: 0 93053 78746 2
EAN: 3 660619 315154
1TB Network Space 2 EK
Product code 301515EK
SN 13391106150688A
Assembled in China
0AF00000256

fvdw
Posts: 777
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: 128 MB instead of 256 MB RAM?

Post by fvdw » Mon Dec 19, 2011 4:57 pm

on the box of my nwsp2 classic similar number except sn are present

Post Reply