From: Gabriel Paubert <paubert@iram.es>
To: Linux-Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 2.4.23-BK9 and DC21142/3
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 17:04:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040107160444.GA4723@iram.es> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040102160640.GA3453@rdlg.net>
On Fri, Jan 02, 2004 at 11:06:41AM -0500, Robert L. Harris wrote:
>
>
> I just installed 2.4.23-bk9 on a system with a ethernet card that
> lscpi reports as DC21142 which is a quad port card. When the machine
> came up it auto negotiated half duplex instead of full. On 2.4.21-ac4
> it negotiated Full.
What driver are you using?
I've had some similar problems recently and had to increase the
autonegotiation timeout in a network driver to make the result of the
autonegotiation stable, otherwise sometimes it would be HD sometimes FD.
The reason was apparently that the driver would fall back to another
method of determining the link speed and this other method limited
itself to half duplex. I even seem to remember that it occasionally
decided to fall back to 10Mb/s half duplex...
It also may depend on the switches and the MII transceiver brand
you use, the combinations I have now seems especially slow at
autonegotiation. I have 2 sets of very similar systems, 6 of one
kind and 4 of another. The first 6 have the same exact components
(DC21140 with National MII transceiver) AFAICT but a slightly
different PCB revision it seems, the slightly older ones are more
affected than later revisions. The last 4 are strictly identical:
DC21143 with Level One (now Intel AFAIR) transceivers, and all 4
behave identically.
At least it does not seem to depend on the phase of the moon :-)
I'm still using 2.2 with de4x5 driver, but there were very few
differences with the 2.4 version of the driver last time I looked.
Gabriel
prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-01-07 16:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-01-02 16:06 2.4.23-BK9 and DC21142/3 Robert L. Harris
2004-01-07 16:04 ` Gabriel Paubert [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040107160444.GA4723@iram.es \
--to=paubert@iram.es \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.