From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LTe3d-0000gd-3S for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2009 10:16:25 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LTe3a-0000fa-Lx for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2009 10:16:23 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=50287 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LTe3a-0000fX-IE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2009 10:16:22 -0500 Received: from mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.49]:49754) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LTe3a-0000Ya-5x for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 01 Feb 2009 10:16:22 -0500 Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 15:16:17 +0000 From: Stuart Brady Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [6490] Update #defines for PCI vendor and device IDs from OpenBIOS and Linux Message-ID: <20090201151617.GA14073@miranda.arrow> References: <20090201132220.GA13663@miranda.arrow> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: Gerd Hoffmann On Sun, Feb 01, 2009 at 04:39:55PM +0200, Blue Swirl wrote: > On 2/1/09, Stuart Brady wrote: > > Isn't the DEC 21154 is a Tulip-compatible NIC, and not a PCI bridge? > > I'd rather guess it's a PCI bridge. Seems I got a bit mixed up, there! > > > +#define PCI_DEVICE_ID_REALTEK_RTL8029 0x8029 > > > #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_REALTEK_8139 0x8139 > > > > (Also, RTL8029 vs. 8139?...) > > That's what ne2k uses (not 8139). Sorry, I wasn't clear -- I was just pointing at the naming i.e. RTL8029 as opposed to just 8029, but wasn't trying to make a big deal out of it. > > I gather 0x1234/0x1111 was originally chosen by Bochs. Unfortunately, > > it is apparently allocated to 'Technical Corp.' Would it be possible > > to use something less confusing instead? > > The IDs could be replaced with some real, original VGA compatible PCI > card, without any extra features. Bochs extensions should probably be > disabled then. Any suggestions? Not sure... perhaps Gerd could help, here? :) (BTW, I notice that OpenBIOS/PPC depends on this particular ID, and I wonder if Bochs BIOS would have to be updated, too.) Cheers, -- Stuart Brady