Subject: Re: Problems with the wm driver
To: Kurt Schreiner <>
From: Bill Studenmund <>
List: current-users
Date: 04/22/2005 09:00:16
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 01:09:51PM +0200, Kurt Schreiner wrote:
> Hi,
> what looks strange to me, is that the interfaces aren't allocated
> "pairwise":

Look close to the pci busses on which the interfaces are found.

> > wm0: Ethernet address 00:11:43:ce:67:38
> > wm1: Ethernet address 00:04:23:b4:e2:5c
> > wm2: Ethernet address 00:04:23:b4:e2:5d
> > wm3: Ethernet address 00:11:43:ce:67:39
> I would expect to see wm3 beeing called wm1 (the onboard ports)
> wm1 called wm2 and wm2 called wm3 (the PCI-card).

Well, they are pci1 device 1 function 0, pci2 device 1 function 0, pci2=20
device 1 function 1, and pci3 device 1 function 0. Why, without wiring the=
motherboard down, would they be named anything differently? :-)

> Hm, if I remember correctly, the interfaces were numbered differently
> in the other dmesg you posted, but not in the "natural" order, too...
> I've no real data to back up what I call natural order, yust a gut
> feeling.

I looked at the other post, and they were in the same order.

Take care,


Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (NetBSD)