From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753936AbXC3Qmh (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Mar 2007 12:42:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753933AbXC3Qmh (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Mar 2007 12:42:37 -0400 Received: from mail.tmr.com ([64.65.253.246]:53163 "EHLO gaimboi.tmr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753932AbXC3Qmg (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Mar 2007 12:42:36 -0400 Message-ID: <460D3D7D.70702@tmr.com> Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 12:40:29 -0400 From: Bill Davidsen Organization: TMR Associates Inc, Schenectady NY User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.0.8) Gecko/20061105 SeaMonkey/1.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Brandeburg, Jesse" CC: Roberto Nibali , Yinghai Lu , Jeff Garzik , "Kok, Auke-jan H" , Adrian Bunk , Andrew Morton , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, saw@saw.sw.com.sg Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] the scheduled eepro100 removal References: <36D9DB17C6DE9E40B059440DB8D95F5202357DB0@orsmsx418.amr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <36D9DB17C6DE9E40B059440DB8D95F5202357DB0@orsmsx418.amr.corp.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Brandeburg, Jesse wrote: > Roberto Nibali wrote: > >>>> Sounds sane to me. My overall opinion on eepro100 removal is that >>>> we're not there yet. Rare problem cases remain where e100 fails >>>> but eepro100 works, and it's older drivers so its low priority for >>>> everybody. >>>> >>>> Needs to happen, though... >>>> >>> It seems that several Tyan Opteron base system that were using IPMI >>> add on card. the IPMI card share intel 100Mhz nic onboard. you need >>> to use eepro100 instead of e100 otherwise the e100 will shutdown OOB >>> (out of Band) connection for IPMI when shut down the OS. >>> >> I find it hard to believe that something as common as IPMI in >> conjunction with the IPMI technology wasn't tested in Intel's lab. >> From my experience with Intel Server boards, onboard IPMI (all offered >> versions) and e100/e1000 NICs, I've never ever experienced any >> problems operating the BMC over the NIC. Also, I don't quite >> understand you point about the "IPMI card sharing the 100Mbit/s NIC" >> onboard? What exactly is shared? >> > > It's a legit problem, but only with this *one* system. > > Of course the eepro100 driver is not taking a lot of maintenance either, removing it is not critical as long as there is a legitimate need to support old hardware. -- bill davidsen CTO TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979