From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: odd RTL8139 quirk. Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 15:32:40 -0700 Message-ID: <20080429153240.7200e1a3.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <20080429171403.GA21035@redhat.com> <48177905.4000409@garzik.org> <20080429215626.GC2859@redhat.com> <48179B56.7000606@garzik.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: davej@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff Garzik Return-path: Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:46183 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753840AbYD2WeQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Apr 2008 18:34:16 -0400 In-Reply-To: <48179B56.7000606@garzik.org> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 18:04:06 -0400 Jeff Garzik wrote: > Dave Jones wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 03:37:41PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > > Dave Jones wrote: > > > > I've just been playing with a model 2 OQO, which has an RTL8139. > > > > It gets detected just fine, though it doesn't actually work.. > > > > > > > > eth0: RealTek RTL8139 at 0xf8830000, 00:00:00:00:00:00, IRQ 18 > > > > eth0: Identified 8139 chip type 'RTL-8139' > > > > > > > > The null MAC address being one clue. Another oddity is that > > > > ethtool reports that there's no link detected, even though there is. > > > > (Enough for it to PXE boot a kernel from at least :) > > > > > > > > Futzing with the debug= modparam didn't yield anything extra at all. > > > > > > > > Any clues? > > > > > > Sounds like a broken EEPROM. Does supplying a MAC via ifconfig prior to > > > 'ifconfig ... up' help? > > > > Ah. This sounds enlightening: http://www.oqotalk.com/index.php/topic,1511.0.html > > Seems a shame to have to choose PIO vs MMIO for a distro kernel though. > > Would there be any objection to turning that into a modparam ? > > (If we wanted to get really fancy, we could even quirk around it automatically > > when we detect broken hardware). > > Something like this? :) > > http://www.linux.sgi.com/archives/netdev/2004-11/msg00226.html > > It did not go upstream but it needed some init-time bug fixing, IIRC. > Maybe akpm remembers more why my patch sucked... :) Apart from its From: address you mean? ;) I can find no record, sorry.