Yes the old is it IRQ 2 or is it IRQ 9 dilemma.  If you go back to the =
original 8 bit ISA bus IBM PC and XT, on the PIC (Programmable Interrupt =
Controller) IRQ was unused.  Upon the advent of the IBM AT, the ISA bus =
became 16 bit and there was a need for additional IRQs.  So IRQ2 was =
used to chain a second PIC at IRQ 9 for additional IRQs.

So, at least in older equipment, IRQ2 and 9 are the same.  I can't =
comment on newer motherboard, because I haven't investigated the issue.

jam

----------
From:  Patrick Welche[SMTP:prlw1@cam.ac.uk]
Sent:  Monday, April 21, 1997 7:27 AM
To:  Leone Marco
Cc:  netbsd-help@netbsd.org
Subject:  Re: Two network cards

Leone Marco wrote:

> a local net in two subnet.
>=20
> I've solved the irq and i/o address conflict, but the kernel doesn't
> seem to recognize the card.
>=20
> What shall I do to let the kernel see the second card?

Have you got both ethernet cards configured in your kernel config file
in the same way you have set the jumpers on your card? Extract from =
mine:

ed0     at isa? port 0x300 iomem 0xd0000 irq 10 # WD/SMC, 3C503, and =
NE[12]000
ed1     at isa? port 0x340 iomem 0xd8000 irq  2 #   ethernet cards

When I first tried this I had a mysterious unknown irq conflict with
11, still don't know from what. irq 2 in the above is detected as irq 9.

Hope this helps,

 Patrick