Re: Attempt to Add a New Tulip PNIC2 82C115 NIC Not Working

[Jason Thorpe <thorpej%me.com@localhost>]

> On Aug 30, 2025, at 1:49 PM, Alexander Jacocks <jjacocks%gmail.com@localhost> wrote:
> 
> If anyone would like to help me, I'd like to submit a patch to add this card to the supported NICs. I'm sure that I did something that isn't kosher in the changes that I made, so I'd love advice.

> { .id = PCI_ID_CODE(PCI_VENDOR_WYSE, PCI_PRODUCT_WYSE_82C115),
>  .value = TULIP_CHIP_82C115 },

If that addition made it Go(tm), then you pretty much did the right thing.  Looks like WYSE simply re-used LiteOn’s existing PCI device ID, which is completely within their right, since they own their ID namespace.  I don’t think it’s really necessary to define a redundant WYSE version of the product ID.  Can you verify this works for you?

Index: if_tlp_pci.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/src/sys/dev/pci/if_tlp_pci.c,v
retrieving revision 1.131
diff -u -p -r1.131 if_tlp_pci.c
--- if_tlp_pci.c 20 Dec 2023 04:32:30 -0000 1.131
+++ if_tlp_pci.c 31 Aug 2025 14:17:48 -0000
@@ -132,10 +132,14 @@ static const struct device_compatible_en
  /*
  * Note: This is like a MX98725 with Wake-On-LAN and a
  * 128-bit multicast hash table.
+ *
+ * This device also appears with a WYSE vendor ID and the regular
+ * LITEON 82C115 product ID.
  */
  { .id = PCI_ID_CODE(PCI_VENDOR_LITEON, PCI_PRODUCT_LITEON_82C115),
    .value = TULIP_CHIP_82C115 },
-
+ { .id = PCI_ID_CODE(PCI_VENDOR_WYSE, PCI_PRODUCT_LITEON_82C115),
+   .value = TULIP_CHIP_82C115 },
      { .id = PCI_ID_CODE(PCI_VENDOR_MACRONIX, PCI_PRODUCT_MACRONIX_MX98713),


-- thorpej