wol support in forcedeth v25

wol support in forcedeth v25

[Arjen Verweij]

Hi,

Is the wol support in forcedeth v25 complete yet? I was trying it with the
2.6.5 kernel it came with, tried the new forcedeth driver with a 2.6.3
kernel (because firewire seems broken in 2.6.5) however, my box will not
wake up as of yet.

According to the source there is a FIXME with a comment about powering
down the NIC. Does this mean that support for wol is incomplete for now?
Mind you, I am just curious, this is in no way meant as criticism.

On another note, Carl-Daniel mentioned that DEV_NEED_TIMERIRQ might be
removed from future releases. Is this still the case? Feedback would be
much appreciated, so I can keep my humble audience up to date on what's
going on at the wol front.

Thank you guys for your excellent work,

Arjen
http://atlas.et.tudelft.nl/verwei90/nforce2/index.html

Re: wol support in forcedeth v25

[Andrew de Quincey]

On Monday 19 April 2004 21:11, Arjen Verweij wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is the wol support in forcedeth v25 complete yet? I was trying it with the
> 2.6.5 kernel it came with, tried the new forcedeth driver with a 2.6.3
> kernel (because firewire seems broken in 2.6.5) however, my box will not
> wake up as of yet.

You're right! It _was_ working with patch-forced-0.25, but it ain't in 2.6.5. 
I'll see if I can spot the problem.

> According to the source there is a FIXME with a comment about powering
> down the NIC. Does this mean that support for wol is incomplete for now?
> Mind you, I am just curious, this is in no way meant as criticism.

That would only be for when WOL is NOT used; I think it has to leave the NIC 
powered up for WOL to work... and as you say it ain't implemented yet.

> On another note, Carl-Daniel mentioned that DEV_NEED_TIMERIRQ might be
> removed from future releases. Is this still the case? Feedback would be
> much appreciated, so I can keep my humble audience up to date on what's
> going on at the wol front.
>
> Thank you guys for your excellent work,
>
> Arjen
> http://atlas.et.tudelft.nl/verwei90/nforce2/index.html

Re: wol support in forcedeth v25

[Arjen Verweij]

OK, let me know if you need a guinea pig to test any patches you might
have.

Regards,

Arjen

On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Andrew de Quincey wrote:

> On Monday 19 April 2004 21:11, Arjen Verweij wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Is the wol support in forcedeth v25 complete yet? I was trying it with the
> > 2.6.5 kernel it came with, tried the new forcedeth driver with a 2.6.3
> > kernel (because firewire seems broken in 2.6.5) however, my box will not
> > wake up as of yet.
>
> You're right! It _was_ working with patch-forced-0.25, but it ain't in 2.6.5.
> I'll see if I can spot the problem.
>
> > According to the source there is a FIXME with a comment about powering
> > down the NIC. Does this mean that support for wol is incomplete for now?
> > Mind you, I am just curious, this is in no way meant as criticism.
>
> That would only be for when WOL is NOT used; I think it has to leave the NIC
> powered up for WOL to work... and as you say it ain't implemented yet.
>
> > On another note, Carl-Daniel mentioned that DEV_NEED_TIMERIRQ might be
> > removed from future releases. Is this still the case? Feedback would be
> > much appreciated, so I can keep my humble audience up to date on what's
> > going on at the wol front.
> >
> > Thank you guys for your excellent work,
> >
> > Arjen
> > http://atlas.et.tudelft.nl/verwei90/nforce2/index.html
>
>

Re: wol support in forcedeth v25

[Andrew de Quincey]

On Tuesday 20 April 2004 12:13, Arjen Verweij wrote:

I found how I could get it going again, but its not the right way of doing 
it.. In nv_close(), if you comment out the lines "nv_stop_rx(dev);" and "if 
(np->wolenabled) nv_start_rx(dev);", WOL works. 

However this isn't the right way to do it, which is why I haven't supplied a 
patch. What its supposed to do it stop receiving, clear any buffers, then 
restart receiving again. But this seems to break WOL for some reason. There 
must be some extra operation required for it all to work properly... I'll 
keep looking.

> OK, let me know if you need a guinea pig to test any patches you might
> have.
>
> Regards,
>
> Arjen
>
> On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Andrew de Quincey wrote:
> > On Monday 19 April 2004 21:11, Arjen Verweij wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Is the wol support in forcedeth v25 complete yet? I was trying it with
> > > the 2.6.5 kernel it came with, tried the new forcedeth driver with a
> > > 2.6.3 kernel (because firewire seems broken in 2.6.5) however, my box
> > > will not wake up as of yet.
> >
> > You're right! It _was_ working with patch-forced-0.25, but it ain't in
> > 2.6.5. I'll see if I can spot the problem.
> >
> > > According to the source there is a FIXME with a comment about powering
> > > down the NIC. Does this mean that support for wol is incomplete for
> > > now? Mind you, I am just curious, this is in no way meant as criticism.
> >
> > That would only be for when WOL is NOT used; I think it has to leave the
> > NIC powered up for WOL to work... and as you say it ain't implemented
> > yet.
> >
> > > On another note, Carl-Daniel mentioned that DEV_NEED_TIMERIRQ might be
> > > removed from future releases. Is this still the case? Feedback would be
> > > much appreciated, so I can keep my humble audience up to date on what's
> > > going on at the wol front.
> > >
> > > Thank you guys for your excellent work,
> > >
> > > Arjen
> > > http://atlas.et.tudelft.nl/verwei90/nforce2/index.html

Re: wol support in forcedeth v25

[Arjen Verweij]

Dear Andrew,

Today I upgraded to forcedeth v0.28. Looking at the Changelog, nothing 
indicates additional changes have been made to WOL support. Is there 
anything I can do to get this in motion again? I am willing to test 
stuff when needed, and give feedback based on my system.

For now I just change:
#define DEV_NEED_TIMERIRQ       0x0008
to
#define DEV_NEED_TIMERIRQ       0x0000

and use pci-config to set the involved bits of the chip to get to D3.

 From http://www.hailfinger.org/carldani/linux/patches/forcedeth/ I 
gather that NVIDIA has contributed gigabit support. Maybe they can spill 
some code to help get WOL support as well? From earlier emails with 
NVIDIA engineers I was told that WOL support is not part of the Linux 
driver, so it may be a long shit :)

Thank you all for a great driver,

Arjen

Andrew de Quincey wrote:

>On Tuesday 20 April 2004 12:13, Arjen Verweij wrote:
>
>I found how I could get it going again, but its not the right way of doing 
>it.. In nv_close(), if you comment out the lines "nv_stop_rx(dev);" and "if 
>(np->wolenabled) nv_start_rx(dev);", WOL works. 
>
>However this isn't the right way to do it, which is why I haven't supplied a 
>patch. What its supposed to do it stop receiving, clear any buffers, then 
>restart receiving again. But this seems to break WOL for some reason. There 
>must be some extra operation required for it all to work properly... I'll 
>keep looking.
>
>  
>
>>OK, let me know if you need a guinea pig to test any patches you might
>>have.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Arjen
>>
>>On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Andrew de Quincey wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>On Monday 19 April 2004 21:11, Arjen Verweij wrote:
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Hi,
>>>>
>>>>Is the wol support in forcedeth v25 complete yet? I was trying it with
>>>>the 2.6.5 kernel it came with, tried the new forcedeth driver with a
>>>>2.6.3 kernel (because firewire seems broken in 2.6.5) however, my box
>>>>will not wake up as of yet.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>You're right! It _was_ working with patch-forced-0.25, but it ain't in
>>>2.6.5. I'll see if I can spot the problem.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>According to the source there is a FIXME with a comment about powering
>>>>down the NIC. Does this mean that support for wol is incomplete for
>>>>now? Mind you, I am just curious, this is in no way meant as criticism.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>That would only be for when WOL is NOT used; I think it has to leave the
>>>NIC powered up for WOL to work... and as you say it ain't implemented
>>>yet.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>On another note, Carl-Daniel mentioned that DEV_NEED_TIMERIRQ might be
>>>>removed from future releases. Is this still the case? Feedback would be
>>>>much appreciated, so I can keep my humble audience up to date on what's
>>>>going on at the wol front.
>>>>
>>>>Thank you guys for your excellent work,
>>>>
>>>>Arjen
>>>>http://atlas.et.tudelft.nl/verwei90/nforce2/index.html
>>>>        
>>>>

Re: wol support in forcedeth v25

[Arjen Verweij]

Ahum. I should have adapted the subject, and I did mean to write "long 
shot".

NOFI at all, I was just typing too fast ;)

Regards,

Arjen


Andrew de Quincey wrote:

>On Tuesday 20 April 2004 12:13, Arjen Verweij wrote:
>
>I found how I could get it going again, but its not the right way of doing 
>it.. In nv_close(), if you comment out the lines "nv_stop_rx(dev);" and "if 
>(np->wolenabled) nv_start_rx(dev);", WOL works. 
>
>However this isn't the right way to do it, which is why I haven't supplied a 
>patch. What its supposed to do it stop receiving, clear any buffers, then 
>restart receiving again. But this seems to break WOL for some reason. There 
>must be some extra operation required for it all to work properly... I'll 
>keep looking.
>
>  
>
>>OK, let me know if you need a guinea pig to test any patches you might
>>have.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Arjen
>>
>>On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Andrew de Quincey wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>On Monday 19 April 2004 21:11, Arjen Verweij wrote:
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Hi,
>>>>
>>>>Is the wol support in forcedeth v25 complete yet? I was trying it with
>>>>the 2.6.5 kernel it came with, tried the new forcedeth driver with a
>>>>2.6.3 kernel (because firewire seems broken in 2.6.5) however, my box
>>>>will not wake up as of yet.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>You're right! It _was_ working with patch-forced-0.25, but it ain't in
>>>2.6.5. I'll see if I can spot the problem.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>According to the source there is a FIXME with a comment about powering
>>>>down the NIC. Does this mean that support for wol is incomplete for
>>>>now? Mind you, I am just curious, this is in no way meant as criticism.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>That would only be for when WOL is NOT used; I think it has to leave the
>>>NIC powered up for WOL to work... and as you say it ain't implemented
>>>yet.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>On another note, Carl-Daniel mentioned that DEV_NEED_TIMERIRQ might be
>>>>removed from future releases. Is this still the case? Feedback would be
>>>>much appreciated, so I can keep my humble audience up to date on what's
>>>>going on at the wol front.
>>>>
>>>>Thank you guys for your excellent work,
>>>>
>>>>Arjen
>>>>http://atlas.et.tudelft.nl/verwei90/nforce2/index.html
>>>>        
>>>>