I did coordinate with you- you didn't offer to share any technical
information with me and seemed to indicate that the driver would have
trouble being released with source. You also said "I haven't written a
NetWork driver either". See correspondence below.
Hey- if your driver is cleaner and better and the way to go, maybe it
should go in. I was paid by a company (that's why the copyright is
Traakan, not me) to do an Intel GigE driver for their proprietary OS, and
I said a FreeBSD/NetBSD version would be part of the deal. I've had some
fun doing this and some grief, and I happen to like the spareness of what
I've done, but I'm not *totally* wedded to it.
It is in fact *because* I remember you mentioning that you were doing a
driver that I didn't just check this into CVS (about 50%- the other 50%
would be to get some review).
-matt
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 09:03:08 -0600
From: Jonathan Lemon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Intel PRO/1000 Gigabit driver
Hello -
If possible, please send me what you have. I just received the
manuals and a sample card for the next generation silicon of this
chip, but probably won't be able to start work on it until later this
week.
--
Jonathan
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 07:10:05 -0800 (PST)
From: Matthew Jacob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Jonathan Lemon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Intel PRO/1000 Gigabit driver
How did you manage to get manuals? I had to reverse engineer the linux
driver? And after having been up for about 72 hours to try and finish this
for a customer, you can imagine I'm a bit dismayed by your mail.
Like, who the heck are you? :-)
On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
> Hello -
>
> If possible, please send me what you have. I just received the
> manuals and a sample card for the next generation silicon of this
> chip, but probably won't be able to start work on it until later this
> week.
> --
> Jonathan
>
On Mon, Nov 22, 1999 at 07:10:05AM -0800, Matthew Jacob wrote:
> How did you manage to get manuals? I had to reverse engineer the linux
> driver? And after having been up for about 72 hours to try and finish this
> for a customer, you can imagine I'm a bit dismayed by your mail.
>
> Like, who the heck are you? :-)
Well, the startup that I was working for got gobbled by cisco, so I
guess I'm now working for cisco. These chips were actually (as was
explained to me) a cisco design, and are produced by intel. So I
asked someone at cisco to obtain documentation on the card for me,
and a package arrived on my desk last friday.
Now, every page has an "Intel Restricted Secret" stamped on it, and
I haven't signed an NDA, but this is probably covered by the employment
agreement I signed last week. However, my understanding is that
both cisco and intel would like to open-source any driver written for
the card. Meaning, I'll write a driver, which should cover both the
existing card and the next-generation card which is due to be released.
As far as FreeBSD is concerned, I know I can release a binary driver
immediatly, while I figure out what cisco's procdedure is for releasing
sources as well. Intel's version is under a BSD license, so I don't
anticipate this being a problem.
Who do you work for, anyway?
--
Jonathan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 09:47:56 -0600
From: Jonathan Lemon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Matthew Jacob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Intel PRO/1000 Gigabit driver
On Mon, Nov 22, 1999 at 07:37:04AM -0800, Matthew Jacob wrote:
> It's my understanding that the next rev chip is Intel only- not cisco.
Perhaps it is, maybe they took the orignal silicon and redid it. But
I'm pretty sure that cisco will be using the next rev in their products.
> Myself. Let me ponder whether to show you my pathetic attempts at a
> network driver.
Well, be forewarned that I haven't written a network driver either;
the only driver I've written is the compaq ida driver, and that was
reverse-engineered from the Linux one.
--
Jonathan
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
