netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 2.6] eepro100: remove ID for 82556

To: Meelis Roos <mroos@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6] eepro100: remove ID for 82556
From: John Ronciak <john.ronciak@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 10:18:25 -0800
Cc: jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=fuGPP718Cz/DANK8fwKDLBRXxzWd+WstBu95frCE79PtvFJmZ94M42icawEM+S/Wqn7xVCjkUHMHmJjZwqCCBtaknmrWcI789pVhxQFlVp3u765EGf7NVf0e5qIrRfjSAbrmK6KBiaOfq6mDpdvsgepS69ABGM28RDW2/60J64A=
In-reply-to: <E1D2Pek-0007RZ-Tk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <4216C8A3.4020303@xxxxxxxxx> <E1D2Pek-0007RZ-Tk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: John Ronciak <john.ronciak@xxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
The 82556 is not support by the e100 driver.  It is a different
architecture than the one started with the 82557 thru the current
generation of PRO/100 controllers.


On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 10:08:02 +0200, Meelis Roos <mroos@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> JG> I see the thread, but I still worry about removing the id in your patch,
> JG> since the poster in the thread says that they had to -add- an ID to both
> JG> e100 and eepro100 in order to perform their test.
> JG>
> JG> Has anyone with this PCI ID actually confirmed that eepro100 does not
> JG> work for them?
> 
> I added the PCI ID only to e100, it was already present in eepro100.
> 
> Neither unmodified eepro100 nor pci-id-added e100 worked with this
> chip so IMHO it's safe to remove this PCI ID from eepro100 too.
> 
> --
> Meelis Roos
> 
> 


-- 
Cheers,
John

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>