Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 08:35:13 -0600 (MDT) From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: Doug White <dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org, Samuel Lam <skl@ScalableNetwork.com> Subject: Re: Solution for 3COM 3C589D PCMCIA Ethernet card problem (fwd) Message-ID: <199704171435.IAA12787@rocky.mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970416175253.12317Y-100000@localhost> References: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970416175253.12317Y-100000@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Subject: Solution for 3COM 3C589D PCMCIA Ethernet card problem > > For those with 3C589*D* cards and want to use the "ep" driver > instead of PAO, I have found the problem. Did you mean to say the 'zp' driver above? I know that folks have used the ep0 device in 2.2 and it's worked. > The EEPROM used inside > the 3C589D seems to be slower than those used in the 3C589C and > older cards, and the DELAY(1000) in read_eeprom_data() isn't long > enough any more. > > Increasing the delay to 1000000 (brute force) works, and some lower > values would likely work as well, but I didn't have time to do a > binary search for the new boundary. I've commited code to -current to if_zp.c to bump up the value, to see if it helps. > A better fix would be to make read_eeprom_data() call f_is_eeprom_busy() > after the DELAY(1000). Agreed, but I have a crappy connection, and don't have time to review the code to come up with a correct fix. Since the zp device is going away at some point, I didn't think spending alot of time fixing it was worthwhile. Thanks! Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199704171435.IAA12787>