[c-nsp] 512MB in GRP?

Grant A. Kirkwood grant at tnarg.org
Mon Apr 25 01:20:29 EDT 2005


Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) wrote:
> Grant A. Kirkwood <mailto:grant at tnarg.org> wrote on Sunday, April 24,
> 2005 12:35 AM:
>>Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) wrote:
>>
>>>>I'm seeing conflicting reports on whether GRP (non -B) works with
>>>>512MB kit installed. I realize it's not supported, but I've heard
>>>>that it seems to be working for some people at least. If this is the
>>>>case, any specific hardware rev or rommon to watch out for? Can
>>>>anyone share their experience?
>>>
>>>
>>>There are three type of GRP's around, watch for the 800-xxxx-yy
>>>number reported in the "MAIN:" line in a "show diag <slot>" output:
>>>
>>>MAIN: type 19,  800-2427-01 is a GRP-A, only supports 256MB.
>>>MAIN: type 19,  800-2427-02 is a GRP-B, only 256 MB DRAM option
>>>orderable (at that time) MAIN: type 19,  800-2427-03 is a GRP-B with
>>>option to go upto 512 MB. 
>>
>>
>>OK, this is related but different. 
> 
> 
> Why different? 
> 
> 
>>Been trying to figure this out for a while:
>>
>>sh diag 0
>>
>>SLOT 0  (RP/LC 0 ): Route Processor
>>   MAIN: type 19,  800-2427-02 rev C0
>>         Deviation:  D006289
>>         HW config: 0xFF    SW key: FF-FF-FF
>>   PCA:  73-2170-06 rev B0 ver 3
>>         Design Release 1.4  S/N CAB0424A1GX
>>   MBUS: MBUS Agent (1)  73-2146-07 rev B0 dev 0
>>         HW version 1.2  S/N CAB04239Z4A
>>         Test hist: 0xFF    RMA#: FF-FF-FF    RMA hist: 0xFF
>>   DIAG: Test count: 0xFFFFFFFF    Test results: 0xFFFFFFFF
>>   FRU:  Linecard/Module: GRP=
>>         Route Memory: MEM-GRP-512=
>>   MBUS Agent Software version 1.98 (RAM) (ROM version is 2.39)
>>   ROM Monitor version 2.2
>>   Primary clock is CSC 1
>>   Board State is IOS Running  ACTIVE (ACTV  RP )
>>   Insertion time: 00:00:04 (10w6d ago)
>>   DRAM size: 536870912 bytes
>>
>>Should this even work?
> 
> 
> Yes, it is a -02 GRP-B, upgradable to 512MB, and since you're using a
> 2.2 rommon version, it will also be recognized. The fact that "GRP" is
> reported is due to CSCeb69172 (see a previous email).


Sorry, I forgot to mention this is on a system running 12.0(27)S4, *not* 
the 12.0(23)S3 mentioned in CSCeb69172.

Grant


More information about the cisco-nsp mailing list