Subject: Re: Fix found for nsphys!
To: Erich T. Enke <Erich.T.Enke@wheaton.edu>
From: Manuel Bouyer <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 07/26/2000 22:44:32
On Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 02:56:35PM -0500, Erich T. Enke wrote:
> Sorry for the vicious cross-posting, but it concerns all three
I guess this could concern more than this - alpha for sure, maybe sparc,
cobalt, ... well, anything with a PCI bus :)
> johnh and I found a fix for our nsphy problem today. The problem had to
> do with a commented out, undocumented mystery bit, removed during the mii
> changes from 1.3.3 to 1.4. The fix uncomments these bits and fixes
> autonegotiation and nastiness in general:
Maybe you could send a PR about this, so it doesn't get lost ?
> --- nsphy.c.orig Wed Jul 26 13:03:43 2000
> +++ nsphy.c Wed Jul 26 14:38:06 2000
> @@ -218,14 +218,17 @@
> reg &= ~PCR_FLINK100;
> -#if 0
> * Mystery bits which are supposedly `reserved',
> * but we seem to need to set them when the PHY
> - * is connected to some interfaces!
> + * is connected to some interfaces:
> + *
> + * 0x0400 is needed for fxp
> + * (Intel EtherExpress Pro 10+/100B, 82557 chip)
> + * (nsphy with a DP83840 chip)
> + * 0x0100 may be needed for some other card
> reg |= 0x0100 | 0x0400;
Do you know if the chip revision was different on these boards ?
Manuel Bouyer <email@example.com>