Re: tx49 Ether problems

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hello.

Atsushi Nemoto wrote:
On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 17:06:23 +0400, Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I agree with you.  Then how about something like
CONFIG_NE2000_RTL8019_BYTEMODE?

   Have you looked at the patch? RTL8019 is easily detectable at
runtime, so the limitation is easily enforcable w/o extra Kconfig
option, I think

Well, I meant something like:

#elif defined(CONFIG_NE2000_RTL8019_BYTEMODE)
#  define DCR_VAL 0x48
#else
#  define DCR_VAL 0x49

to avoid changing #elif line every time when we want to support a new
board with byte-mode RTL8019AS.  Of course, calculating DCR_VAL at
runtime would be much better but I'm not sure if we can do it ...

Hm, with only 3-4 known boards so far (all Toshiba RBTX49[23][78], RBTX4925 also has the chip but I see no 2.6 support for this board), I doubt that it's worth the effort. And the option sounds a bit "too specific", IMO. :-)

Also, setting 0xbad value to mem_end
can skip the Product-ID checking without inflating bad_clone_list.
Just a thought...

Er, calling RTL8019AS in 8-bit mode "NE2000" (as the driver would have done in case of RBTX49xx if we have used 0xbad), is not a correct thing. :-)

   0xbad in dev->mem_end currently skips 8390 reset which is not a
good thing for the clones for which it does work...

The 8390 reset will not skipped.  The difference is behavior _after_
detection of no reset ack, isn't it?

   Yes, I was too hasty and have overlooked this. :-)

---
Atsushi Nemoto

WBR, Sergei


[Index of Archives]     [Linux MIPS Home]     [LKML Archive]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux]     [Git]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]

  Powered by Linux