Re: What's needed for a PCIe card to be recognized?

["Hans J. Koch" <hjk@linutronix.de>]

Am Sat, 16 Feb 2008 18:29:39 -0800
schrieb Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>:

> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 01:54:53 +0100
> Hans-Jürgen Koch <hjk@linutronix.de> wrote:
> 
> > Am Sat, 16 Feb 2008 14:39:46 -0800
> > schrieb Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>:
> > 
> > > On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 22:59:32 +0100
> > > Hans-Jürgen Koch <hjk@linutronix.de> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > I'm playing around with a vanilla 2.6.25-rc1, adding patches to
> > > > make it work on an Asus EeePC. That one has the problem that its
> > > > Mini PCIe WLAN module doesn't show up in lspci. That brought up
> > > > a few questions that I couldn't answer yet:
> > > > 
> > > > How can they "hide" a PCIe card?
> > > > What could be their motive to do that?
> > > > How can I make it appear?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > go to the bios, enable the wireless card. 
> > > 
> > > that did it for me ;)
> > 
> > It didn't for me. I tried all combinations (booting with/without
> > WLAN enabled, enabling WLAN through /proc with/without pciehp
> > loaded and so on). What kernel did you use, and which patches did
> > you apply?
> > 
> 
> I used a pretty much stock Fedora 8 kernel..

Hm, interesting. My guess was that enabling the card in BIOS simply
switches the power of the WLAN card on. But I really don't understand
why it's not detected then with my vanilla kernel. My naive thought was
that the kernel scans all possible PCI[e] slots a chipset offers and
finds all cards there. Seems to be a bit more subtle...

> no magic patches at all.

Well, they've at least added atl2 support, otherwise you had no
wired LAN either.

> Of course there's no driver for the wlan, but that's a different
> story ;)

I replaced that unsupported Atheros 5007 card with an ipw3945, so I
haven't got that problem.

Thanks,
Hans