Package: linux-2.6 Version: 2.6.15-6 Currently, the modules.pcimap for DEC tulip chips is as follows: tulip 0x00001011 0x00000009 0xffffffff 0xffffffff 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x0 tulip 0x00001011 0x00000019 0xffffffff 0xffffffff 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x0 de2104x 0x00001011 0x00000002 0xffffffff 0xffffffff 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x0 de2104x 0x00001011 0x00000014 0xffffffff 0xffffffff 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x0 lmc 0x00001011 0x00000009 0x00001376 0xffffffff 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x0 lmc 0x00001011 0x00000009 0xffffffff 0x00001376 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x0 Presently, neither de2104x nor lmc is being included in the installer images for etch; this is because discover1-data lists de4x5 as the module for *all* of these PCI IDs. With the switch to 2.6 in d-i, this means that a number of common NICs for alpha (0002, 0014, 0009) are not being auto-detected by udev. The de4x5 module *can* be loaded by hand on my own system (1011:0002), and appears to work correctly; this is the driver that I've been using under 2.6 on my installed system. I am also now testing de2104x; so far, it does appear to work. The apparent trade-off between de2104x is that de4x5 does not support full-duplex mode, whereas I have some vague impression that de2104x didn't work on my system in some earlier driver revision. However, the discover1-data changelog doesn't support this; it mentions that 1011:1002 uses de4x5 because of bug #273265, which was about tulip, not de2104x -- and tulip doesn't detect my card at all, so there's no doubt that *that* is the wrong driver. Recent discussion of this issue on debian-alpha included the following response froman Alpha expert at HP: ------------------------------------------------------- From: Jay Estabrook <Jay.Estabrook@hp.com> To: debian-alpha@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: testing wanted: debian-installer, now with 2.6.15 Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 10:53:43 -0500 On Sun, Feb 12, 2006 at 03:41:24AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > So should the 21040 and 21041 be switched from de2104x to de4x5, or should > de2104x be added to the installer? I seem to recall that I had problems > with de2104x on my 21040 as well; and at least in 2.6.15, the tulip driver > doesn't work at all for my card, I have to use de4x5. > The discover1-data package seems to have de4x5 listed for *all* of these PCI > IDs, but I think we may be using the kernel's map now with 2.6 (via udev). I don't know of any problems using "tulip" on the 2114x chipsets. And I don't think full duplex will significantly increase the throughput of a 2104x chipset, so, yes, I'd think that using de4x5 for any 2104x and tulip fo any 2114x might be the way to go... ------------------------------------------------------- We probably shouldn't make that change in Debian without talking to whoever's responsible for these drivers upstream, though. In the meantime, I'm going to add de2104x into the d-i images. This bug report is opened to collect success/failure reports regarding the current driver mappings, so we can be sure we're making an informed decision about these historically-problematic PCI IDs. For the record, de4x5 is currently not referenced in modules.pcimap at all, so depending on the outcome of this bug report, it may make sense to drop it completely from the 2.6 build... Thanks, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature