On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 07:51:16PM +0000, Fujinaka, Todd wrote: > Also, I'm not sure what you mean by 0xBABA. That would be an interesting > coincidence if the checksum was 0xBABA, but the checksum should be > recalculated when the iNVM is changed. There could be a chance that whoever > programmed the part was using an older broken version of the programming tool.
When talking about 0xBABA I am referring to chapter 6.8.8 'Checksum Word' of the i210 datasheet. I see that the sourceforge driver v5.2.5 (giving the csum error) is checking for NVM_SUM (0xBABA), whereas the Linux v3.8 version does not, it has no .validate callback. I am just wondering why both drivers have different behaviour, and which one is correct. Esp. so after checking both datasheets. I send an inquiry to the HW manufacturer already today. /Holger ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech _______________________________________________ E1000-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel To learn more about Intel® Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired
