Hi,
This patch applied to linux kernel 2.4.19-per6 to support VIA's new
NIC chip.
However, VIA don't have any nic chip with pci device id 0x6100 so far,
so this patch also remove the device ID 0x6100.
--- linux/drivers/net/via-rhine.c.orig Fri Apr 12 15:36:38 2002
+++ linux/drivers/net/via-rhine.c Fri Apr 12 15:39:04 2002
@@ -317,7 +317,8 @@
enum via_rhine_chips {
VT86C100A = 0,
VT6102,
- VT3043,
+ VT6105,
+ VT6105M,
};
struct via_rhine_chip_info {
@@ -345,7 +346,9 @@
CanHaveMII | ReqTxAlign },
{ "VIA VT6102 Rhine-II", RHINE_IOTYPE, 256,
CanHaveMII | HasWOL },
- { "VIA VT3043 Rhine", RHINE_IOTYPE, 128,
+ { "VIA VT6105 Rhine-III", RHINE_IOTYPE, 256,
+ CanHaveMII | ReqTxAlign },
+ { "VIA VT6105M Rhine-III", RHINE_IOTYPE, 256,
CanHaveMII | ReqTxAlign }
};
@@ -353,7 +356,8 @@
{
{0x1106, 0x6100, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, VT86C100A},
{0x1106, 0x3065, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, VT6102},
- {0x1106, 0x3043, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, VT3043},
+ {0x1106, 0x3106, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, VT6105},
+ {0x1106, 0x3106, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, VT6105M},
{0,} /* terminate list */
};
MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(pci, via_rhine_pci_tbl);
@@ -510,7 +514,7 @@
int i;
/* 3043 may need long delay after reset (dlink) */
- if (chip_id == VT3043 || chip_id == VT86C100A)
+ if (chip_id == VT86C100A)
udelay(100);
i = 0;
@@ -531,7 +535,7 @@
static void __devinit enable_mmio(long ioaddr, int chip_id)
{
int n;
- if (chip_id == VT3043 || chip_id == VT86C100A) {
+ if (chip_id == VT86C100A) {
/* More recent docs say that this bit is reserved ... */
n = inb(ioaddr + ConfigA) | 0x20;
outb(n, ioaddr + ConfigA);
--
Chuang Liang-Shing
VIA Technologies, Inc.
+886-2-22185452 Ext. 7523
E-Mail: [email protected]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Shing Chuang" <[email protected]>
> Hi,
>
> This patch applied to linux kernel 2.4.19-per6 to support VIA's new
> NIC chip.
> However, VIA don't have any nic chip with pci device id 0x6100 so
far,
> so this patch also remove the device ID 0x6100.
>
Typo here I guess... (it removes ID 0x3043)
<snip>
> @@ -345,7 +346,9 @@
> CanHaveMII | ReqTxAlign },
> { "VIA VT6102 Rhine-II", RHINE_IOTYPE, 256,
> CanHaveMII | HasWOL },
> - { "VIA VT3043 Rhine", RHINE_IOTYPE, 128,
> + { "VIA VT6105 Rhine-III", RHINE_IOTYPE, 256,
> + CanHaveMII | ReqTxAlign },
> + { "VIA VT6105M Rhine-III", RHINE_IOTYPE, 256,
> CanHaveMII | ReqTxAlign }
> };
Strange that Rhine-II doesn't require TxAlign, still the newer Rhine-III's
need it? Copy-paste typo or is it really this way?
_____________________________________________________
| Martin Eriksson <[email protected]>
| MSc CSE student, department of Computing Science
| Umea University, Sweden