From: Ion Badulescu <ionut@moisil.cs.columbia.edu>
To: vido@ldh.org
Cc: torvalds@transmeta.com, alan@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrey Savochkin <saw@saw.sw.com.sg>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] eepro100.c, kernel 2.4.1
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 23:23:01 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200102080723.f187N1v17541@moisil.dev.hydraweb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20010208145355.A18627@ldh.org>
On Thu, 8 Feb 2001 14:53:55 +0900, Augustin Vidovic <vido@ldh.org> wrote:
> --- linux-2.4.1/drivers/net/eepro100.c Sun Jan 28 03:40:14 2001
> +++ linux-2.4.1-vido1/drivers/net/eepro100.c Thu Feb 8 14:08:49 2001
> @@ -815,7 +815,7 @@
>
> sp->phy[0] = eeprom[6];
> sp->phy[1] = eeprom[7];
> - sp->rx_bug = (eeprom[3] & 0x03) == 3 ? 0 : 1;
> + sp->rx_bug = eeprom[3] & 0x03;
>
> if (sp->rx_bug)
> printk(KERN_INFO " Receiver lock-up workaround activated.\n");
This patch is wrong, please DON'T apply it.
It's the printk that gets it wrong, although that's harmless.
Intel's documentation states that the bug does NOT exist if the
bits 0 and 1 in eeprom[3] are 1. Thus, the workaround is correct,
the printk is wrong.
The correct patch for 2.4.1 is attached. 2.2.18 needs something
similar, the same patch can be applied with some fuzz.
Thanks,
Ion
--
It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool,
than to open it and remove all doubt.
--------------------------------
--- /usr/src/local/linux-2.4.vanilla/drivers/net/eepro100.c Wed Feb 7 15:45:16 2001
+++ linux-2.4/drivers/net/eepro100.c Wed Feb 7 23:07:29 2001
@@ -725,7 +725,7 @@
/* The self-test results must be paragraph aligned. */
volatile s32 *self_test_results;
int boguscnt = 16000; /* Timeout for set-test. */
- if (eeprom[3] & 0x03)
+ if ((eeprom[3] & 0x03) != 0x03)
printk(KERN_INFO " Receiver lock-up bug exists -- enabling"
" work-around.\n");
printk(KERN_INFO " Board assembly %4.4x%2.2x-%3.3d, Physical"
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-02-08 7:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-02-08 5:53 [PATCH] eepro100.c, kernel 2.4.1 Augustin Vidovic
2001-02-08 7:23 ` Ion Badulescu [this message]
2001-02-08 7:37 ` Augustin Vidovic
2001-02-08 7:42 ` Alan Cox
2001-02-08 7:55 ` Andrey Savochkin
2001-02-08 7:59 ` [PATCH] " Ion Badulescu
2001-02-08 10:41 ` Augustin Vidovic
2001-02-08 11:00 ` Ion Badulescu
2001-02-08 11:15 ` Augustin Vidovic
2001-02-08 11:26 ` Ion Badulescu
2001-02-08 11:44 ` Augustin Vidovic
2001-02-08 11:53 ` Ion Badulescu
2001-02-08 12:08 ` Augustin Vidovic
2001-02-12 5:32 ` Andrey Savochkin
2001-02-12 9:00 ` Ion Badulescu
2001-02-20 6:30 ` Augustin Vidovic
2001-02-20 7:21 ` Andrey Savochkin
2001-02-20 8:18 ` Augustin Vidovic
2001-02-20 23:38 ` Andrey Savochkin
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-02-09 14:38 [PATCH] " Peter Lund
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=200102080723.f187N1v17541@moisil.dev.hydraweb.com \
--to=ionut@moisil.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=alan@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=saw@saw.sw.com.sg \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
--cc=vido@ldh.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox