Intel Atom C2xxx LPC failures
-
Get ready folks… this is going to be a fun ride soon. :) Cisco has started having routers and switches fail due to an LPC clock failure. Coincidentally, Intel has updated the errata of their Atom C2000-series chips, indicating that an LPC clock failure can prevent the system from booting. Cisco didn't name-and-shame the company producing the failed part in their gear, but it's pretty coincidental that Intel happens to update their errata at the same time Cisco announces issues with their hardware indicating the same failure.
Cisco claims that the failure can start after as little as 18 months of use.
Intel claims to have a platform-level workaround that can be used. Of course, there are no details in the errata about the workaround.
This could make for some fun times soon, given all of the Rangeley chips being used in systems running pfSense.
Article on The Register, the update at the bottom indicates the Atom may be at fault in Cisco's gear.
-
http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/specification-updates/atom-c2000-family-spec-update.pdf
Not fun at all and not only for pfSense users. But what "A platform level change has been identified and may be implemented as a workaround for this erratum." means? -
Oh Dear.
I've got a ASA5506, SG-2220, 2 x SG-2440 and a SG-4860.Can't wait to hear about that "workaround".
Would love to learn how pfSense/ADI are planning to handle this issue?
Would prefer a software/firmware patch, and hope there won't be a need for Hardware replacement.
I think cisco are doing HW replacements.
-
if it turns out to be true it's gonna really chap a lot of people who were convinced they really needed to buy "server grade" components. :D
-
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-cpu-failure-atom-processor,33538.html
-
More Info here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/homelab/comments/5sb89p/psa_so_it_seems_that_intels_c2xxx_series_of_cpus/
Anybody from pfSense/Netgate/Adi care to comment ?
-
Has anyone contacted Supermicro about this?
-
All the information available online leads me to believe that the issue is not limited to Cisco. I.e. Intel is very clear about AVR54 and the affected processors. It's safe to assume that the ADI/NetGate/pfSense boxes are affected, too (as well as some Synology NAS')
Unless there's some magic "firmware bullet" I'm convinced that most vendors will just ride this issue out - or at best manage the issue on a Case by Case basis. If Cisco could've pushed out a firmware fix they would've done it in a heartbeat.
I'd be more than happy to receive replacements boards from Netgate/pfSense (for my 2240, 2440 and 4860's) but my hopes are indeed very slim.
The pfSense store shows One year manufacturer's warranty and my boxes are already 1+ year old. That absolves pfSense of the responsibility to replace my SG Series Appliances - which by the way have not yet even failed.Do I sleep comfortable that my network sits on a time bomb ? No.
Do I sleep comfortable that my employer's network sits on a time bomb ? No.Perhaps ADI/NetGate/PfSense do not have the same level of clout with intel as Cisco does, but I'd surely hope ADI/NetGate/PfSense will work out some sort of arrangement with intel to reduce the impact on existing customers.
I would suggest that affected Rangely/Avoton customers should receive a heavy discount when buying from the pfSense Store again.
-
This issue has nothing to do with warranty since its a design flaw…replacement or upgrade program is needed.
Personally I have my core network based on C2000, pfSense and Synology units.
There is an open thread on Synology. I also wrote to Supermicro in order to get a solution before failure occurs. -
It's eerily quiet here …. :-\
-
iXsystems FreeNAS Mini at risk too.
-
I also wrote to Supermicro in order to get a solution before failure occurs.
Please let us know what they say… there are plenty here that have SuperMicro boards with the Atom C2xxx processors on them.
-
I also contaced Supermicro yesterday, seems at least the European support did not know about the issue yet. Sent them an explanation and some links. Now they are checking with the PM of the motherboard.
-
Hmm, the Intel doc says stepping B0 is affected. My Supermicro board says:
CPU: Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU C2758 @ 2.40GHz (2400.07-MHz K8-class CPU) Origin="GenuineIntel" Id=0x406d8 Family=0x6 Model=0x4d Stepping=8From what I have gathered about steppings, the version normally consist of a letter followed by a number. So what could "8" mean?
I'd love to think that Cisco got the whole B0 stepping, but then again my (and all the googled dmesg) results are missing the letter…Any experts on this?
-
CPU: Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU C2558 @ 2.40GHz (2400.06-MHz K8-class CPU) Origin="GenuineIntel" Id=0x406d8 Family=0x6 Model=0x4d Stepping=8Well, yeah, that is not very helpful at all.
-
I also contacted Supermicro (EU) and asked them if it only affects one specific stepping.
Apparently even they don't know if it only affects the B0 stepping, because Intel doesn't want to give out too many details.
The hardware update Supermicro has in place (or will have in place) is for all A1 motherboards though.
-
CPU: Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU C2558 @ 2.40GHz (2400.06-MHz K8-class CPU) Origin="GenuineIntel" Id=0x406d8 Family=0x6 Model=0x4d Stepping=8Well, yeah, that is not very helpful at all.
Have a look here:
https://www-ssl.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/specification-updates/atom-c2000-family-spec-update.pdf
Page 15 Table 9
CPUID: 406D8
-
Oh, well. Thanks! :-X
Guess I will buy/build a new pfSense appliance and then RMA my board. Not cool at all.
-
Supermicro support told me to RMA my board to get a "reworked" one. They do not handle RMAs directly with the customer, though. I bought it from Amazon.de. So much for my reworked version…
-
We're still investigating internally, we'll put out an official response once we have enough information.
You can also follow some additional conversation on the topic here: https://www.reddit.com/r/PFSENSE/comments/5s8pwi/intel_c_series_processor_recalls_are_pf_official/
