Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!194.179.1.100!minerva.ibernet.es!news.rediris.es!news.upm.es!ioda!jmrueda From: jmrueda@diatel.upm.es (Javier Martin Rueda ) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: 2.2.1: Does Intel EtherExpress Pro/10 driver work? Date: 19 May 1997 23:56:12 GMT Organization: Dpt. Ing. Telematica Lines: 48 Message-ID: <5lqpas$fhb$1@sanson.dit.upm.es> References: <5ldsi3$qiq$1@Venus.mcs.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: ioda.diatel.upm.es Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2] Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:41263 Hi. I wrote the EtherExpress Pro/10 driver. > The Pro/10, set for IRQ 10 and port 300 and TP only, is happy all the > way up the ifconfig, at which point the light on the hub goes out, and > no traffic goes out. At work, my computer has an Intel EtherExpress Pro/10 network card, and it works fine, but the network uses thin ethernet coaxial cable, not TP. I have tested the driver on some other computers at work, but probably all have very similar card steppings, hardware, and so on. Anyhow, my "beta-testers" here were not very good because they run Windows 95 on their computers and it's a pain in the ass trying to make them boot Unix from time to time, specially for beta-testing. :-) I haven't tested the driver myself under TP, and had no news about this problem. I have read a couple other messages in this thread about people with the same problem, so it must be a definite bug, or something like that. At this precise moment, I don't know why this may happen. Let me think about it, and I'll try to determine the cause of that behaviour. The problem is that Intel's documents (at least, the ones I got from them) are not very clear about programming details and you have to figure out by yourself too many things (or maybe, I am not skillful enough, who knows). > The Pro/10+, also set for IRQ 10 and port 300 and TP only, is alive > according to the hub, but the driver claims that the EEPROM on the > card has the card marked for IRQ 0 (zero). This version of the I knew about this problem because some time ago a friend at work who has that card model experienced the same problem. Fortunately, the Pro/10 and Pro/10+ do not have too many differences, and I wrote a quick fix for him, and now he is using the Pro/10+ under FreeBSD on a regular basis (although with coaxial cable too). As I intended to do some other enhancements, I didn't forward the fix to the FreeBSD team. So, I'd appretiate very much if you could download a new version of the driver with that upgrade from my ftp site and see if it works for you. With a little patience on your part, I think the driver could be made better in a little time. I kindly request the help of those other persons who were complaining about the driver in this newsgroup, too. :-) On tuesday or wednesday, you'll find this newer version on: ftp://ftp.diatel.upm.es/incoming/jmrueda2/ Small flame: I don't understand why Intel has marketed about four or five cards with almost the same name, but incompatible among them, sometimes even with totally different chipsets: Pro/16, Pro/10, Pro/10+, Pro/100, etc, etc.