cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
02606
Contributor
Contributor
2,370 Views
Registered: ‎05-27-2009

Expectations of performance

Lately I've been working to get NFS up and working on an ML405. My systems are various flavors of Ubuntu, rarely do I ever have a windows box on. After running into a few problems, mostly between my ears, I took the well placed advice of a previous poster and booted up a system with initrd running. I had already confirmed that I could mount the file system on a second desktop system so I was finally able to approach the task of mounting the RFS from within a minicom serial terminal.

 

Lately, I've been using Gene Sally's " Pro Linux Embedded Systems", absolutely fantastic book! On page 205 he gives the command for mounting NFS, I used ..

 

mount -t nfs -o nolock 192.168.1.13:/home/flash/opt/nfs_mnt mnt/nfs

 

So... I waited, and waited, and waited finally after about 5 minutes the command prompt comes back with the files system in place. That's about 5 times longer than it takes me to make, and copy a new file system onto a compact flash and do it manually.

 

When I run ping I get return times of around 60 us, with no errors. I'm trying to get wireshark up and running so I can see if I'm loosing packets somewhere, but my expectation is I'm not.

 

This is a real disappointment. This is not the kind of performance I see out of my other embedded linux systems!

 

This is completely in line with the comments of other posters regarding slow network behavior.

 

I'm very much between a rock and a hard place here. I desperately need the FPGA with Linux, I don't need the headache. This should be fun, not some agonizing labor fraught with unexpected roadblocks.

 

What I need presently is some voice in the wilderness to say, "hang in there guy - it will be OK", "it will be worth the effort".

 

Otherwise, I'm going to jump to the OMAP and place FPGAs in the category of "for logic only - do not use for embedded OS solutions"

 

So, if anyone out there has encountered a similar circumstance of could offer a kind constructive word, I'm all ears. Even knowing that it is possible to load NFS in a few seconds would be a BIG boost to my spirits.

 

It is not fair to Xilinx customers, or for that matter those few involved Xilinx employees (1), to expect them to carry the load for the development of Linux solutions. If Xilinx wants to be a player, then they should commit the resources necessary to make their embedded Linux solutions competitive.

 

0 Kudos
Reply
1 Reply
linnj
Xilinx Employee
Xilinx Employee
2,334 Views
Registered: ‎09-10-2008

Hang in there, you're close. 

 

NFS does work as our automated tests use it.  My apologies for slow response, got buried.

 

You almost had the command right, but not quite.  With busybox there is no portmapper running so you have to help the NFS mount a bit more.

 

bash> mount -o port=2049,nolock,proto=tcp <ip>:<dir> <mount dir>

 

But you do also have to realize the Open Source Linux is a lot of work and learning.  For people that don't know it well and have a lot of project pressure that's why Linux distros like Petalinux and others exist, to help you and minimize the work.

 

Xilinx strives to help with our stuff, but like in this case it wasn't our stuff, it's just the system and learning it well.

 

Thanks, hope that helps.

0 Kudos
Reply