Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 27 Aug 2001 20:50:26 -0700 (PDT) | From | java programmer <> | Subject | Intel e100 Ethernet card support in core Kernel |
| |
Hi:
There is built in support for intel cards in the core kernel. My question is, whether using this kernel support is the best way to drive intel cards.
I have a dual port intel pro/100 adapter and am experiencing a complete lockup (not even pingable) after a certain amount of time. I am on kernel 2.4.7, downloaded from kernel.org and compiled. I have libc-2.2.3.so in /lib
Here's the relevant section from dmesg (shown for eth0 only):
---------- Intel(R) PRO/100 Fast Ethernet Adapter - Loadable driver, ver 1.6.13 Copyright (c) 2001 Intel Corporation
eth0: Compaq Fast Ethernet Server Adapter Using specified speed/duplex mode of 0. Using specified ucode value of 1. Using specified CPU saver interrupt delay value of 1536. Using specified CPU saver bundle max value of 10. Mem:0xc6cf0000 IRQ:11 Speed:100 Mbps Dx:Full Hardware receive checksums disabled ----------------
And here is the module load line from /etc/rc.d/rc.modules
/sbin/modprobe e100 ucode=1,1 IntDelay=0x600,0x600 BundleMax=10,6 e100_speed_duplex=0,0
The above is my current configuration that leads to the lockup. Please note, this is the absolute latest and well tested driver - for this card - straight from intel.
Now here's the thing: initially I had a 2.4.5 kernel, with a stock, built in driver for this card that gave me the following dmesg:
----- eth0: OEM i82557/i82558 10/100 Ethernet, :50:8B:E3:AA:B4, IRQ 11. Receiver lock-up bug exists -- enabling work-around. Board assembly 009542-003, Physical connectors present: RJ45 Primary interface chip i82555 PHY #1. General self-test: passed. Serial sub-system self-test: passed. Internal registers self-test: passed. ROM checksum self-test: passed (0x24c9f043). Receiver lock-up workaround activated. ------
I took the above driver out, in favor of the newer intel driver, but note, the newer intel driver gives me no message about the "lock up bug", that this other older driver gives me (see first line in dmesg output above).
So does anyone know what's going on and whether the newer intel drivers are in fact more broken than the older ones that came with the kernel ? I haven't tried the older ones enough to know whether the lock up would exist with them too or not, any driver writers care to shed some light on this ?
Best regards,
javadesigner@yahoo.com
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger http://phonecard.yahoo.com/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |