From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roger Luethi Subject: Re: pci-skeleton duplex check Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:20:33 +0100 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Message-ID: <20021212132033.GA3224@k3.hellgate.ch> References: <20021211132436.GA12529@k3.hellgate.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@oss.sgi.com Return-path: To: Donald Becker Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:42:44 -0500, Donald Becker wrote: > Note that the second check ignores 100baseT4, despite it have priority > over 10baseT-*. That was intentional to work around, "a specific issue" > with a transceiver. That "specific issue" might be worth documenting. Information on such quirks is hardest to come by. > The is no extra cost to the extra bit, and it makes it clear we are > testing for 10baseT-FDX. > (The test was originally implemented as part of a complete set of > cases. The test code needed while building a driver is more complex > than what you see in the concise final result.) That was exactly the kind of answer I've been looking for. Nothing beats some historic background. Thank you. Roger