[patch] NET: remove support for Davicom 9102 from the Tulip driver

[patch] NET: remove support for Davicom 9102 from the Tulip driver

[Chuck Ebbert]

NET: remove support for Davicom 9102 from the Tulip driver

We have two reports that agree the tulip driver doesn't work for
the Davicom 9102 (PCI id 1282:9102). The dmfe driver does work
and also claims the same PCI ID.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=277731
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=236928

Signed-off-by: Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@redhat.com>

---
 drivers/net/tulip/tulip_core.c |    1 -
 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)

--- linux-2.6.24.noarch.orig/drivers/net/tulip/tulip_core.c
+++ linux-2.6.24.noarch/drivers/net/tulip/tulip_core.c
@@ -231,7 +231,6 @@ static struct pci_device_id tulip_pci_tb
 	{ 0x11F6, 0x9881, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, COMPEX9881 },
 	{ 0x8086, 0x0039, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, I21145 },
 	{ 0x1282, 0x9100, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, DM910X },
-	{ 0x1282, 0x9102, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, DM910X },
 	{ 0x1113, 0x1216, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, COMET },
 	{ 0x1113, 0x1217, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, MX98715 },
 	{ 0x1113, 0x9511, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, COMET },

Re: [patch] NET: remove support for Davicom 9102 from the Tulip driver

[Jeff Garzik]

Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> NET: remove support for Davicom 9102 from the Tulip driver
> 
> We have two reports that agree the tulip driver doesn't work for
> the Davicom 9102 (PCI id 1282:9102). The dmfe driver does work
> and also claims the same PCI ID.
> 
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=277731
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=236928
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@redhat.com>
> 
> ---
>  drivers/net/tulip/tulip_core.c |    1 -
>  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> 
> --- linux-2.6.24.noarch.orig/drivers/net/tulip/tulip_core.c
> +++ linux-2.6.24.noarch/drivers/net/tulip/tulip_core.c
> @@ -231,7 +231,6 @@ static struct pci_device_id tulip_pci_tb
>  	{ 0x11F6, 0x9881, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, COMPEX9881 },
>  	{ 0x8086, 0x0039, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, I21145 },
>  	{ 0x1282, 0x9100, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, DM910X },
> -	{ 0x1282, 0x9102, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, DM910X },
>  	{ 0x1113, 0x1216, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, COMET },
>  	{ 0x1113, 0x1217, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, MX98715 },
>  	{ 0x1113, 0x9511, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, COMET },

applied

Re: [patch] NET: remove support for Davicom 9102 from the Tulip driver

[Meelis Roos]

CE> We have two reports that agree the tulip driver doesn't work for
CE> the Davicom 9102 (PCI id 1282:9102). The dmfe driver does work
CE> and also claims the same PCI ID.

NAK, dmfe does not work on some Sparc64 machines but tulip does.

I happent to have a Sun Fire V100 with 2 Davicom NICs (1282:9102 (rev 
31)).
tulip driver works for them, dmfe doesn't. Tried with 2.6.25-rc7, first 
it
gets MAC addresses all zeroed and second, it only results in Tx 
timeouts.

This issue was debugged somemonths ago on sparclinux mailing list. DaveM
fixed some bugs IIRC but it still does not work.

Sun Netra X1 is a similar Sun system with dmfe's.

-- 
Meelis Roos (mroos@linux.ee)

Re: [patch] NET: remove support for Davicom 9102 from the Tulip driver

[Jeff Garzik]

Meelis Roos wrote:
> CE> We have two reports that agree the tulip driver doesn't work for
> CE> the Davicom 9102 (PCI id 1282:9102). The dmfe driver does work
> CE> and also claims the same PCI ID.
> 
> NAK, dmfe does not work on some Sparc64 machines but tulip does.
> 
> I happent to have a Sun Fire V100 with 2 Davicom NICs (1282:9102 (rev 
> 31)).
> tulip driver works for them, dmfe doesn't. Tried with 2.6.25-rc7, first 
> it
> gets MAC addresses all zeroed and second, it only results in Tx 
> timeouts.

At the very least, it sounds like some SROM parsing problems on dmfe's 
part -- assuming a standard SROM when sparc64 provides a more 
complicated one.


> This issue was debugged somemonths ago on sparclinux mailing list. DaveM
> fixed some bugs IIRC but it still does not work.

URL to more info?

Overall we need someone to either (a) work on tulip to get it working 
with popular 9102's, or (b) work on dmfe to get it working on sparc64... 
  Installers and users will continue to be confused by the present 
situation, where the same PCI ID is claimed by two different drivers, 
and you just sorta haveta "know" which one is right.

	Jeff

Re: [patch] NET: remove support for Davicom 9102 from the Tulip driver

[David Miller]

From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2008 17:38:06 -0400

> Meelis Roos wrote:
> > CE> We have two reports that agree the tulip driver doesn't work for
> > CE> the Davicom 9102 (PCI id 1282:9102). The dmfe driver does work
> > CE> and also claims the same PCI ID.
> > 
> > NAK, dmfe does not work on some Sparc64 machines but tulip does.
> > 
> > I happent to have a Sun Fire V100 with 2 Davicom NICs (1282:9102 (rev 
> > 31)).
> > tulip driver works for them, dmfe doesn't. Tried with 2.6.25-rc7, first 
> > it
> > gets MAC addresses all zeroed and second, it only results in Tx 
> > timeouts.
> 
> At the very least, it sounds like some SROM parsing problems on dmfe's 
> part -- assuming a standard SROM when sparc64 provides a more 
> complicated one.

With the onboard Sparc64 davicoms, the SROM is essentially empty.

Re: [patch] NET: remove support for Davicom 9102 from the Tulip driver

[Jeff Garzik]

David Miller wrote:
> From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
> Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2008 17:38:06 -0400
> 
>> Meelis Roos wrote:
>>> CE> We have two reports that agree the tulip driver doesn't work for
>>> CE> the Davicom 9102 (PCI id 1282:9102). The dmfe driver does work
>>> CE> and also claims the same PCI ID.
>>>
>>> NAK, dmfe does not work on some Sparc64 machines but tulip does.
>>>
>>> I happent to have a Sun Fire V100 with 2 Davicom NICs (1282:9102 (rev 
>>> 31)).
>>> tulip driver works for them, dmfe doesn't. Tried with 2.6.25-rc7, first 
>>> it
>>> gets MAC addresses all zeroed and second, it only results in Tx 
>>> timeouts.
>> At the very least, it sounds like some SROM parsing problems on dmfe's 
>> part -- assuming a standard SROM when sparc64 provides a more 
>> complicated one.
> 
> With the onboard Sparc64 davicoms, the SROM is essentially empty.

In this case, should dmfe be retrieving the MAC address via

	addr = of_get_property(dp, "local-mac-address", &len);

as tulip is doing?

One thing that seems quite obvious is that dmfe is missing all the 
CONFIG_SPARC goodies that tulip has.

	Jeff

Re: [patch] NET: remove support for Davicom 9102 from the Tulip driver

[David Miller]

From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2008 18:06:17 -0400

> In this case, should dmfe be retrieving the MAC address via
> 
> 	addr = of_get_property(dp, "local-mac-address", &len);
> 
> as tulip is doing?

That's right.

> One thing that seems quite obvious is that dmfe is missing all the 
> CONFIG_SPARC goodies that tulip has.

Yep.

Re: [patch] NET: remove support for Davicom 9102 from the Tulip driver

[Grant Grundler]

On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 05:38:06PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Meelis Roos wrote:
>> CE> We have two reports that agree the tulip driver doesn't work for
>> CE> the Davicom 9102 (PCI id 1282:9102). The dmfe driver does work
>> CE> and also claims the same PCI ID.
>> NAK, dmfe does not work on some Sparc64 machines but tulip does.

jeff and davem already answered the basic SROM/MAC address issue.
Patches to fix this are associated with
	http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9106

There is another "dmfe" issue reported in:
	http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9094

But I think this one is related to something newer gcc versions (early
4.2 and current gcc-4.3. I've seen the same behavior with tulip driver
on parisc as described in bug #9094.


>> I happent to have a Sun Fire V100 with 2 Davicom NICs (1282:9102 (rev 
>> 31)).
>> tulip driver works for them, dmfe doesn't.

This experience doesn't agree with the bug report.
Meelis, can you please take a look at the bug report and add comments?

>> Tried with 2.6.25-rc7, first it
>> gets MAC addresses all zeroed and second, it only results in Tx timeouts.
>
> At the very least, it sounds like some SROM parsing problems on dmfe's part 
> -- assuming a standard SROM when sparc64 provides a more complicated one.
>
>
>> This issue was debugged somemonths ago on sparclinux mailing list. DaveM
>> fixed some bugs IIRC but it still does not work.
>
> URL to more info?

http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9106

> Overall we need someone to either (a) work on tulip to get it working with 
> popular 9102's, or (b) work on dmfe to get it working on sparc64...  

We tried (b) but didn't get it working on V100 previously.
Several patches are attached to the bug report.


> Installers and users will continue to be confused by the present situation, 
> where the same PCI ID is claimed by two different drivers, and you just 
> sorta haveta "know" which one is right.

Agreed.  But I don't have consistent evidence that one is better than
the other. I'm open to reports of evidence for remove specific PCI IDs
from either driver.

thanks for adding me to the CC list.

grant

Re: [patch] NET: remove support for Davicom 9102 from the Tulip driver

[Meelis Roos]

> jeff and davem already answered the basic SROM/MAC address issue.
> Patches to fix this are associated with
> 	http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9106

> >> I happent to have a Sun Fire V100 with 2 Davicom NICs (1282:9102 (rev 
> >> 31)).
> >> tulip driver works for them, dmfe doesn't.
> 
> This experience doesn't agree with the bug report.
> Meelis, can you please take a look at the bug report and add comments?

Comments added.

> We tried (b) but didn't get it working on V100 previously.
> Several patches are attached to the bug report.

There was one patch (for getting the MAC from OpenFirmware) but as 
people reported that the Tx timeouts still happen, I didn't try it. Any 
reason to try?

-- 
Meelis Roos (mroos@linux.ee)

Re: [patch] NET: remove support for Davicom 9102 from the Tulip driver

[Grant Grundler]

On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 05:28:03PM +0300, Meelis Roos wrote:
> > jeff and davem already answered the basic SROM/MAC address issue.
> > Patches to fix this are associated with
> > 	http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9106
> 
> > >> I happent to have a Sun Fire V100 with 2 Davicom NICs (1282:9102 (rev 
> > >> 31)).
> > >> tulip driver works for them, dmfe doesn't.
> > 
> > This experience doesn't agree with the bug report.
> > Meelis, can you please take a look at the bug report and add comments?
> 
> Comments added.

thanks!
I saw the comments were added but haven't read them yet.

> > We tried (b) but didn't get it working on V100 previously.
> > Several patches are attached to the bug report.
> 
> There was one patch (for getting the MAC from OpenFirmware) but as 
> people reported that the Tx timeouts still happen, I didn't try it. Any 
> reason to try?

Documenting the configuration that does work is the only reason.
I don't think pursueing dmfe is worthwhile if in general tulip driver
is expected to work.

thanks,
grant

> 
> -- 
> Meelis Roos (mroos@linux.ee)

Re: [patch] NET: remove support for Davicom 9102 from the Tulip driver

[Meelis Roos]

>> -     { 0x1282, 0x9102, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, DM910X },

> applied

Hmm, did you see my yesterdays answer to that patch - that dmfe should 
first be fixed to work on all  cards with this PCI ID? Currenty dmfe 
fails to work on at least Sun Fire V100 and Sun Netra X1 boxes, only 
tulip works.

-- 
Meelis Roos (mroos@linux.ee)

Re: [patch] NET: remove support for Davicom 9102 from the Tulip driver

[David Miller]

From: Meelis Roos <mroos@linux.ee>
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2008 11:56:44 +0300 (EEST)

> 
> >> -     { 0x1282, 0x9102, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, DM910X },
> 
> > applied
> 
> Hmm, did you see my yesterdays answer to that patch - that dmfe should 
> first be fixed to work on all  cards with this PCI ID? Currenty dmfe 
> fails to work on at least Sun Fire V100 and Sun Netra X1 boxes, only 
> tulip works.

Don't worry I won't pull from Jeff's tree until this issue is
resolved.

Re: [patch] NET: remove support for Davicom 9102 from the Tulip driver

[Jeff Garzik]

Meelis Roos wrote:
>>> -     { 0x1282, 0x9102, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, DM910X },
> 
>> applied
> 
> Hmm, did you see my yesterdays answer to that patch - that dmfe should 
> first be fixed to work on all  cards with this PCI ID? Currenty dmfe 
> fails to work on at least Sun Fire V100 and Sun Netra X1 boxes, only 
> tulip works.

I didn't see that, no...   thanks for poking me.

	Jeff

Re: [patch] NET: remove support for Davicom 9102 from the Tulip driver

[Jeff Garzik]

Meelis Roos wrote:
>>> -     { 0x1282, 0x9102, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, DM910X },
> 
>> applied
> 
> Hmm, did you see my yesterdays answer to that patch - that dmfe should 
> first be fixed to work on all  cards with this PCI ID? Currenty dmfe 
> fails to work on at least Sun Fire V100 and Sun Netra X1 boxes, only 
> tulip works.
> 

Maybe this tulip_core.c code needs to be applied to dmfe.c?

         if (tulip_uli_dm_quirk(pdev)) {
                 csr0 &= ~0x01f100ff;
#if defined(CONFIG_SPARC)
                 csr0 = (csr0 & ~0xff00) | 0xe000;
#endif
         }

A zeroed MAC address leads me to believe that dmfe's SROM parsing isn't 
quite as capable as tulip's, though that's just a guess.

Just checked dmfe with sparse and it reports clean, though looking at 
the code it could use some cleanups.

	Jeff

Re: [patch] NET: remove support for Davicom 9102 from the Tulip driver

[David Miller]

From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2008 17:59:56 -0400

> A zeroed MAC address leads me to believe that dmfe's SROM parsing isn't 
> quite as capable as tulip's, though that's just a guess.
> 
> Just checked dmfe with sparse and it reports clean, though looking at 
> the code it could use some cleanups.

The sparc64 onboard davicoms don't indicate anything in the
SROM area.

Properties such as MAC addresses need to be obtained via
openfirmware probing methods.