From: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
To: Francois Romieu <romieu@fr.zoreil.com>,
Sorbica Shieh <sorbica@icplus.com.tw>,
Jesse Huang <jesse@icplus.com.tw>
Cc: Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: ipg and dl2k both claiming D-Link DGE-550T
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 15:26:38 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B7467FE.2010406@suse.com> (raw)
Hi all -
I've seen this report a bunch of times but google didn't point to any
resolution. I'm not really involved with network driver development, so
I'm hoping that someone who knows the history here can speak up.
I have a report[1] where the D-Link DGE-550T is being associated with the
ipg driver. It works for a very short amount of time and then fails.
Unloading the driver and loading dl2k instead results in a working
system. The DGE-550T is a DL2000 based card, but the ipg (IP1000)
driver is claiming it and has been since the driver was added to the
kernel in 2.6.24. dl2k has been claiming this ID since the 2.4 days.
Which driver is correct? Can we remove the PCI IDs associated with the
wrong driver? Users keep working around this with module blacklisting
but they shouldn't have to.
Thanks.
-Jeff
[1] https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=579219
---
ipg: Remove device claimed by dl2k from pci id table
This patch removes D-Link DGE-550T PCI ID (1186:4000) from the ipg
driver. The ipg driver is for IP2000-based cards and the DGE-550T is
a DL2000-based card. The driver loads and works for a few moments, but
once a real workload is applied it stops operating. The ipg driver
claimed this ID since it was introduced in 2.6.24 and it's forced many
users to blacklist it.
The correct driver for this hardware is the dl2k driver, which has been
claiming this PCI ID since the 2.4 days.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
---
drivers/net/ipg.c | 4 +---
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
--- a/drivers/net/ipg.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ipg.c
@@ -88,7 +88,6 @@ static const char *ipg_brand_name[] = {
"Sundance Technology ST2021 based NIC",
"Tamarack Microelectronics TC9020/9021 based NIC",
"Tamarack Microelectronics TC9020/9021 based NIC",
- "D-Link NIC",
"D-Link NIC IP1000A"
};
@@ -97,8 +96,7 @@ static struct pci_device_id ipg_pci_tbl[
{ PCI_VDEVICE(SUNDANCE, 0x2021), 1 },
{ PCI_VDEVICE(SUNDANCE, 0x1021), 2 },
{ PCI_VDEVICE(DLINK, 0x9021), 3 },
- { PCI_VDEVICE(DLINK, 0x4000), 4 },
- { PCI_VDEVICE(DLINK, 0x4020), 5 },
+ { PCI_VDEVICE(DLINK, 0x4020), 4 },
{ 0, }
};
--
Jeff Mahoney
SUSE Labs
reply other threads:[~2010-02-11 20:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4B7467FE.2010406@suse.com \
--to=jeffm@suse.com \
--cc=jesse@icplus.com.tw \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=romieu@fr.zoreil.com \
--cc=sorbica@icplus.com.tw \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).