Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 07:46:32 +1000 From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: SimsS@Infi.Net, davidg@Root.COM Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Some recent changes to GENERIC Message-ID: <199607102146.HAA28066@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>(For my benefit, can anyone explain why the default port address for ed0 >>is 0x280? I assume some historical reason, but I really don't know the >>details....) Perhaps it was to avoid a conflict with another (non-ed) ethercard at 0x300, but nothing is gained if ed1 is on 0x300. >>OK, how 'bout this: I'll endorse nuking the ed1 device, but only if the >>default settings for the ed0 device are changed to 5/300 in GENERIC. What >>say? > This seems reasonable to me. 0x300 is supported by all of the ed-compatible >cards as far as I know. I use 0x300/15 because interrupts below 8 are too scarce towaste on 16-bit cards, so GENERIC kernels never work without boot time configuration here. The factory default is 0x300/3 (irq 3 is the default because the board is designed to work in 8-bit slots and irq 5 is not available on XT's). The wrong GENERIC ed0 works better than the wrong GENERIC ed1 here because the failure is more obvious :-) - when I forget to change the irq, the ed1 probe works because the address is right and interrupt timeouts occur later. Bruce
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199607102146.HAA28066>