Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 07 Nov 2006 09:43:45 -0800 | From | Auke Kok <> | Subject | Re: Intel 82559 NIC corrupted EEPROM |
| |
H. Peter Anvin wrote: > John wrote: >> >> I then used ethtool to dump the contents of the EEPROMs. >> >> # ethtool -e eth0 >> Offset Values >> ------ ------ >> 0x0000 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff >> 0x0010 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff >> 0x0020 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff >> 0x0030 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff >> 0x0040 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff >> 0x0050 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff >> 0x0060 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff >> 0x0070 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff >> >> Either the EEPROM image on eth0 is corrupted, or ethtool is not >> able to read the contents of the EEPROM. >> > > [...] > >> >> I then used Donald Becker's program to dump the contents of all >> the EEPROMs. ( ftp://www.scyld.com/pub/diag/ ) >> >> # eepro100-diag -ee >> eepro100-diag.c:v2.13 2/28/2005 Donald Becker (becker@scyld.com) >> http://www.scyld.com/diag/index.html >> >> Index #1: Found a Intel i82557/8/9 EtherExpressPro100 adapter at 0xd800. >> EEPROM contents, size 64x16: >> 00: 3000 0464 e4e6 0e03 0000 0201 4701 0000 _0d__________G__ >> 0x08: 7213 8310 40a2 0001 8086 0000 0000 0000 _r___@__________ >> ... >> 0x30: 0128 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 (_______________ >> 0x38: 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 92f7 ________________ >> The EEPROM checksum is correct. >> Intel EtherExpress Pro 10/100 EEPROM contents: >> Station address 00:30:64:04:E6:E4. >> Board assembly 721383-016, Physical connectors present: RJ45 >> Primary interface chip i82555 PHY #1. >> Sleep mode is enabled. This is not recommended. >> Under high load the card may not respond to >> PCI requests, and thus cause a master abort. >> To clear sleep mode use the '-G 0 -w -w -f' options. >> >> Index #2: Found a Intel i82557/8/9 EtherExpressPro100 adapter at 0xdc00. >> EEPROM contents, size 64x16: >> 00: 3000 0464 e5e6 0e03 0000 0201 4701 0000 _0d__________G__ >> 0x08: 7213 8310 40a2 0001 8086 0000 0000 0000 _r___@__________ >> ... >> 0x30: 0128 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 (_______________ >> 0x38: 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 91f7 ________________ >> The EEPROM checksum is correct. >> Intel EtherExpress Pro 10/100 EEPROM contents: >> Station address 00:30:64:04:E6:E5. >> Board assembly 721383-016, Physical connectors present: RJ45 >> Primary interface chip i82555 PHY #1. >> Sleep mode is enabled. This is not recommended. >> Under high load the card may not respond to >> PCI requests, and thus cause a master abort. >> To clear sleep mode use the '-G 0 -w -w -f' options. >> >> Index #3: Found a Intel i82557/8/9 EtherExpressPro100 adapter at 0xe000. >> EEPROM contents, size 64x16: >> 00: 3000 0464 e6e6 0e03 0000 0201 4701 0000 _0d__________G__ >> 0x08: 7213 8310 40a2 0001 8086 0000 0000 0000 _r___@__________ >> ... >> 0x30: 0128 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 (_______________ >> 0x38: 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 90f7 ________________ >> The EEPROM checksum is correct. >> Intel EtherExpress Pro 10/100 EEPROM contents: >> Station address 00:30:64:04:E6:E6. >> Board assembly 721383-016, Physical connectors present: RJ45 >> Primary interface chip i82555 PHY #1. >> Sleep mode is enabled. This is not recommended. >> Under high load the card may not respond to >> PCI requests, and thus cause a master abort. >> To clear sleep mode use the '-G 0 -w -w -f' options. >> >> Apparently, eepro100.ko is able to read the contents of the EEPROM on >> eth0 and it declares the checksum correct. Is it possible that there >> is a bug in e100.c that makes it fail to read the EEPROM on eth0? >> > > Sure as heck sounds like it.
(Please CC either me or at netdev on all intel nic drivers. thanks. I removed `john@privacy.net` since it throws a bounce, and linux.nics@intel.com is a support address only, doesn't reach us developers)
how did you do the first `ethtool` eeprom dump? did you have the `e100` module loaded at that time? Did you use the new `override` mechanism graciously donated by David M?
Cheers,
Auke - 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/
| |