Re: tx49 Ether problems

[Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@ru.mvista.com>]

Hello.

Atsushi Nemoto wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 17:06:23 +0400, Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@ru.mvista.com> wrote:

>>>I agree with you.  Then how about something like
>>>CONFIG_NE2000_RTL8019_BYTEMODE?

>>    Have you looked at the patch? RTL8019 is easily detectable at
>>runtime, so the limitation is easily enforcable w/o extra Kconfig
>>option, I think

> Well, I meant something like:

> #elif defined(CONFIG_NE2000_RTL8019_BYTEMODE)
> #  define DCR_VAL 0x48
> #else
> #  define DCR_VAL 0x49

> to avoid changing #elif line every time when we want to support a new
> board with byte-mode RTL8019AS.  Of course, calculating DCR_VAL at
> runtime would be much better but I'm not sure if we can do it ...

    Hm, with only 3-4 known boards so far (all Toshiba RBTX49[23][78], 
RBTX4925 also has the chip but I see no 2.6 support for this board), I doubt 
that it's worth the effort. And the option sounds a bit "too specific", IMO. :-)

>>> Also, setting 0xbad value to mem_end
>>>can skip the Product-ID checking without inflating bad_clone_list.
>>>Just a thought...

    Er, calling RTL8019AS in 8-bit mode "NE2000" (as the driver would have 
done in case of RBTX49xx if we have used 0xbad), is not a correct thing. :-)

>>    0xbad in dev->mem_end currently skips 8390 reset which is not a
>>good thing for the clones for which it does work...

> The 8390 reset will not skipped.  The difference is behavior _after_
> detection of no reset ack, isn't it?

    Yes, I was too hasty and have overlooked this. :-)

> ---
> Atsushi Nemoto

WBR, Sergei