On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 05:29:19PM -0500, David H. Barr wrote:
> Would this be the same or a related problem that prevents the onboard
> Tulips in my c200's from coming up? http://bugs.debian.org/328882
I don't think so since 2.6.8.2 was working in the other case.
> Short summary: onboard DEC 21142/43 can't / won't even come up far
> enough to acknowledge the presence of a wire (light on my switch never
> activates) -- "tulip1: no phy info, aborting mtable build"
I read your bug report (good notes, btw) and I have to wonder
(a) why do install kernel and resulting installed kernel
enumerate NICs in different order?
AFAIK, NICs are only discovered in "PCI Bus" order.
Only way to change the ethX names is with nameif.
(b) fixes to support 21142 Phy (your add-on card)
only got posted a few monthes ago. This diff is missing
from the Debian 2.6.8-2 kernel:
http://cvs.parisc-linux.org/linux-2.6/drivers/net/tulip/media.c?r1=1.17&r2=1.18
I don't expect your add-on NIC to work with 2.6.8-2.
(c) built-in NIC should work fine. No idea what's going on here.
I'm not aware of any code changes that might break this.
Any chance you can try a newer kernel (2.6.8-12 or 2.6.12-*)
from unstable?
> http://dhbarr.freeshell.org/c200/lspci-vv.txt
> http://dhbarr.freeshell.org/c200/dmesg.txt
eth0: Digital DS21143 Tulip rev 33 at 0xf2802000, 00:60:B0:B2:F8:65, IRQ 99.
eth1: Digital DS21143 Tulip rev 48 at 0xf2803000, 00:60:B0:FD:B4:59, IRQ 96.
d) why is this kernel reporting MMIO space?
Other kernels used IO Port space. At least I thought it did...maybe
the 0x0 IO Port space address is just a red herring.
My preference is the kernel use MMIO space at this point.
Older kernels might still need to use IO Port pace to support
card-mode Dino Tulips (aka GSC 100BT cards).
hth,
grant
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
