[Fwd: [vortex] Does 3c59x.c support 3C905C-TXM ?] ... more!

[Marcus Ramos]

Hello,

Maybe this will add helpful information to the problem below:

- If I use only the on-board NIC (3C905C-TX), it works equally with 3c59x or
3c90x;
- If I use only the PCI NIC board (3C905C-TXM), this means, if I disable the
on-board NIC, it works 3c90x but not with 3c59x;
- If I use both the PCI NIC (3C905-TXM) AND and on-board NIC (3C905C-TX), none
of them will work with either 3c59x or 3c90x;
- Further, if the 3C905-TXM is added to yet another box, which has an on-board
NIC from Intel, only the 3c90x will work. 3c59 won't in this case.

This makes me guess that:

1) 3c59x supports 3C905C-TX but not 3C905-TXM;
2) In order to use the 3C905C-TXM I have to load 3c90x; however, if the
3C905C-TX and the 3C905-TXM are simultaneously present on the same box, 3c90x
won't work anymore.

Am I right ? I hope not, because I would rather use 3c59x, instead of 3c90x, to
drive the 3C905C-TXM NIC.

Regards,
Marcus.

Marcus Ramos wrote:

> Hi again,
>
> Thank you very much for your reply.
>
> First of all, I am sorry that I forgot an extra letter "C" in the question
> below. My real concern was about the differences between 3C905C-TX and
> 3C905C-TXM (that is, the "M" suffix in the latter). Anyway, I am experiencing
> the following problem, and if you or somebody else have comments on that I
> will be very grateful.
>
> SITUATION I:
>
> Dell GX110 PIII running RH7 kernel 2.2.16. On-board NIC 3C905-TX.
> /etc/modules.conf contains:
> "alias eth0 3c59x".
>
> The system boots OK and the interface works OK.
>
> SITUATION II:
>
> Same as above, except that an extra 3C905-TXM (not just -TX) is plugged into
> a PCI slot. So now I have two NICs in theb box. A second line is added to
> /etc/modules.conf, which then becomes:
> "alias eth0 3c59x"
> "alias eth1 3c59x"
>
> The system boots OK but none of the interfaces work. When trying to use one
> or the other, for example with ping, I get the message "Destination not
> reachable". lsmod tells me that 3c59x is properly loaded and is being used by
> 2 interfaces (as I expected). But why isn't any of them working in this
> situation ?
>
> Regards,
> Marcus.
>
> Bogdan Costescu wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 26 Mar 2001, Marcus Ramos wrote:
> >
> > > a) What is the difference between 3C905C-TX and 3C905-TXM ?
> >
> > Different generation. 905C is 3-4 years newer than 905. There are some
> > significant design differences, although 905C is capable of "emulating" a
> > 905.
> >
> > > b) Does 3c59x.c support both 3C905-TX and 3C905-TXM ? How can I make it
> > > work for 3C905C-TXM as well ?
> >
> > Yes. Just replace 'alias eth1 3c90x' with 'alias eth1 3c59x'.
> >
> > > c) Why did linux (RH7 kernel 2.2.16) choose 3c90x for eth1 but did not
> > > load it ?
> >
> > Probably the 3c59x driver (which was loaded first, for eth0) also detected
> > your second card and "attached" to it, because it supports it. Then
> > another driver trying to "attach" would get "Device busy" or likewise.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Bogdan Costescu
> >
> > IWR - Interdisziplinaeres Zentrum fuer Wissenschaftliches Rechnen
> > Universitaet Heidelberg, INF 368, D-69120 Heidelberg, GERMANY
> > Telephone: +49 6221 54 8869, Telefax: +49 6221 54 8868
> > E-mail: Bogdan.Costescu@IWR.Uni-Heidelberg.De