Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 10:47 am Post subject: [Asterisk-bsd] FreeBSD 7 and zaptel-bsd
Em Sex, 2007-11-02 ās 12:55 +1100, Tony escreveu:
Quote:
FreeBSD 7.0 is now in beta . Has anybody had any luck getting
zaptel-bsd to work under FreeBSD 7?
The zaptel module as version 1.4.6 (in the ports) really locks in the
kernel in the "destroy" function.
In release freebsd prior to 7.0 the destroy does not "destroy" de
entries in /dev and silent ignores it... But in 7.0 it waits for
something (may be to free/unlock) all the resources..
A rapid solution is to ignore the destroy call in zaptel close
routine...
=======================================
Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:20 pm Post subject: [Asterisk-bsd] FreeBSD 7 and zaptel-bsd
User Lenzi wrote:
Quote:
Em Sex, 2007-11-02 ās 12:55 +1100, Tony escreveu:
> FreeBSD 7.0 is now in beta . Has anybody had any luck getting
> zaptel-bsd to work under FreeBSD 7?
>
The zaptel module as version 1.4.6 (in the ports) really locks in the
kernel in the "destroy" function.
In release freebsd prior to 7.0 the destroy does not "destroy" de
entries in /dev and silent ignores it... But in 7.0 it waits for
something (may be to free/unlock) all the resources..
A rapid solution is to ignore the destroy call in zaptel close
routine...
destroy_dev_sched should do the trick. I've upgraded my development
system to 7.0-BETA3 and
is testing zaptel-bsd-ng branch right now.
--
gonzo
_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com--
Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 1:01 pm Post subject: [Asterisk-bsd] FreeBSD 7 and zaptel-bsd
Quote:
Quote:
destroy_dev_sched should do the trick. I've upgraded my development
system to 7.0-BETA3 and
is testing zaptel-bsd-ng branch right now.
Ok thanks I will test this too...
I have several 7.0 boxes running here....
I notice also a problem with E1 and Dual core cpu (intel only)
when using
machdep.cpu_idle_hlt: 1
and.....
hz=1000
====================
a noise of about 1Khz in the call...
using machdep.cpy.idle_hlt=0 solves the problem
When using AMD cpus (X2) there is no problem.
also using SHCED_ULE in the 7.0 produces a great preformance
when using several E1s and analogic TDM400 in the same machine
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum