2003-06-15 01:39:46

by Pete Clements

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: 2.5.71 -- Lost second 3c509 card

With 2.5.71, have lost second 3c509 card (i386 UP).

>From kernel boot log with 2.5.71 get
eth%%d: 3c5x9 at 0x300, BNC port, address 00 20 af 26 bf 2c, IRQ 10.

>From kernel boot log with 2.5.70 get
eth0: 3c5x9 at 0x300, BNC port, address 00 20 af 26 bf 2c, IRQ 10.
eth1: 3c5x9 at 0x310, 10baseT port, address 00 60 08 15 31 84, IRQ 9.

Checking on a single card system (SMP), the
eth%%d: indication was introduced with 2.5.70-bk10.
--
Pete Clements
[email protected]


2003-06-15 13:05:41

by Pete Clements

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: 2.5.71 -- Lost second 3c509 card


> With 2.5.71, have lost second 3c509 card (i386 UP).
>
> >From kernel boot log with 2.5.71 get
> eth%%d: 3c5x9 at 0x300, BNC port, address 00 20 af 26 bf 2c, IRQ 10.
>
> >From kernel boot log with 2.5.70 get
> eth0: 3c5x9 at 0x300, BNC port, address 00 20 af 26 bf 2c, IRQ 10.
> eth1: 3c5x9 at 0x310, 10baseT port, address 00 60 08 15 31 84, IRQ 9.
>
> Checking on a single card system (SMP), the
> eth%%d: indication was introduced with 2.5.70-bk10.

As a followup, reverted the 3c509 bk10 changes. Back in business
with 2.5.71.
--
Pete Clements
[email protected]

2003-06-15 16:06:05

by David Miller

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: 2.5.71 -- Lost second 3c509 card

On Sun, 2003-06-15 at 06:19, Pete Clements wrote:
> As a followup, reverted the 3c509 bk10 changes. Back in business
> with 2.5.71.

Are you using command line port number specifications?
If so, what do they look like?

--
David S. Miller <[email protected]>

2003-06-15 16:36:44

by Pete Clements

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: 2.5.71 -- Lost second 3c509 card

Quoting David S. Miller
> On Sun, 2003-06-15 at 06:19, Pete Clements wrote:
> > As a followup, reverted the 3c509 bk10 changes. Back in business
> > with 2.5.71.
>
> Are you using command line port number specifications?
> If so, what do they look like?
>
> --
> David S. Miller <[email protected]>
>

>From boot log:

Kernel command line: auto BOOT_IMAGE=Linux ro root=341 ether=9,0x310,4,0x3c509,eth1
--
Pete Clements
[email protected]

2003-06-15 16:42:17

by David Miller

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: 2.5.71 -- Lost second 3c509 card

From: Pete Clements <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 12:50:25 -0400 (EDT)

>From boot log:

Kernel command line: auto BOOT_IMAGE=Linux ro root=341 ether=9,0x310,4,0x3c509,eth1

Yes, that explains why the second card isn't found.

The problem is:

1) the we can't assign a name to the device
until we've registered it with the networking

2) without a name the boot argument lookup doesn't work

3) we have to register the device with the networking only
after it is initialized

Hmmm...

2003-06-15 23:17:57

by Al Viro

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: 2.5.71 -- Lost second 3c509 card

On Sun, Jun 15, 2003 at 09:52:01AM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
> From: Pete Clements <[email protected]>
> Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 12:50:25 -0400 (EDT)
>
> >From boot log:
>
> Kernel command line: auto BOOT_IMAGE=Linux ro root=341 ether=9,0x310,4,0x3c509,eth1
>
> Yes, that explains why the second card isn't found.
>
> The problem is:
>
> 1) the we can't assign a name to the device
> until we've registered it with the networking
>
> 2) without a name the boot argument lookup doesn't work
>
> 3) we have to register the device with the networking only
> after it is initialized
>
> Hmmm...

Crap. AFAICS, the clean solution would be to pass these guys (blah_probe())
expected device name. And let them do allocation, etc., themselves.

Looking into it...