> That file includes: > # PCI device 0x10ec:0x8168 (r8169) > SUBSYSTEM=="net", ACTION=="add", DRIVERS=="?*", > ATTR{address}=="xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx", ATTR{dev_id}=="0x0", ATTR{type}=="1", > KERNEL=="eth*", NAME="eth0"
> # PCI device 0x10b7:0x9050 (3c59x) > SUBSYSTEM=="net", ACTION=="add", DRIVERS=="?*", > ATTR{address}=="xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx", ATTR{dev_id}=="0x0", ATTR{type}=="1", > KERNEL=="eth*", NAME="eth1" > On further checking, it may be that renaming is acceptable - in > /var/log/messages: > Feb 7 04:51:22 puffin kernel: [ 6.122403] 3c59x 0000:03:02.0: PCI INT A > -> GSI 18 (level, low) -> IRQ 18 > Feb 7 04:51:22 puffin kernel: [ 6.122407] 3c59x: Donald Becker and > others. > Feb 7 04:51:22 puffin kernel: [ 6.122411] 0000:03:02.0: 3Com PCI 3c905 > Boomerang 100baseTx at 000000000001df00. > Feb 7 04:51:22 puffin kernel: [ 6.148201] Linux agpgart interface v0.103 > Feb 7 04:51:22 puffin kernel: [ 6.153035] udev: renamed network > interface eth0 to eth1 > Feb 7 04:51:22 puffin kernel: [ 6.156559] r8169 Gigabit Ethernet driver > 2.3LK-NAPI loaded > Feb 7 04:51:22 puffin kernel: [ 6.156573] r8169 0000:02:00.0: PCI INT A > -> GSI 17 (level, low) -> IRQ 17 > Feb 7 04:51:22 puffin kernel: [ 6.157040] eth0: RTL8168d/8111d at > 0xffffc90000c78000, x:x:x:x:x:x, XID 083000c0 IRQ 32 > Feb 7 04:51:22 puffin kernel: [ 6.161239] r8169 0000:02:00.0: firmware: > requesting rtl8168d-2.fw > Feb 7 04:51:22 puffin kernel: [ 6.234448] eth0: unable to apply firmware > patch > Perhaps the kernel brings eth1 into existence by first establishing it as > eth0, then renaming it to eth1; then bringing the "real" eth0 into > existence. > The "unable to apply firmware patch" seems potentially alarming, but it > used to work as a single-interface system. lspci -v indicates both > NICs have "Kernel driver in use". Re the renaming of eth1/3c59x: is eth1/3c59x compiled into the kernel and eth0/r8169 is compiled as module? Re eth0/r8169 firmware: is rtl8168d-2.fw in /lib/firmware? if eth0 is up and running it might not need this patch (!). can you ping through eth0 if you remove eth1? I have just looked at your first email. eth0 does not have a default gateway. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org