On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 09:31:17AM -0500, Jay Estabrook wrote: > On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 09:03:39AM -0500, Jay Estabrook wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 02:12:45AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > > IIRC, de4x5 can't do full duplex. But then again, de4x5 will work on
> > > > all (?) boxes, whereas tulip is known to fail on some (AS250/AS500).
> > > What PCI ID?
> Actually, I should have said that "de2104x" was known to fail on those
> machines (AS250/AS500/Multia) that have a builtin 21040 (old/original)
> TULIP.
> The "tulip" driver gets used for 21140 and 21142/21143 (the 10/100
> capable chips).
> PCI IDs are as follows:
And the 2.6.15 modules.pcimap entry for these is given below
> chip ID Comment
> ---- ---- -------
> 21040 0002 original TULIP, 10BT only
de2104x
> 21041 0014 TULIP "plus", also 10BT only
de2104x
> 21140 0009 TULIP "fast", 10/100 BT capable
lmc
> 21142 0019 10/100 capable, appeared only on-board some MIATAs, IIRC
> 21143 0019 10/100 capable, appeared on-board MIATA, and separate boards
tulip
> All with DEC's vendor ID of 1011.
So should the 21040 and 21041 be switched from de2104x to de4x5, or should
de2104x be added to the installer? I seem to recall that I had problems
with de2104x on my 21040 as well; and at least in 2.6.15, the tulip driver
doesn't work at all for my card, I have to use de4x5.
The discover1-data package seems to have de4x5 listed for *all* of these PCI
IDs, but I think we may be using the kernel's map now with 2.6 (via udev).
Cheers,
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
