A change I made for 2.6.17 and another for 2.6.18 do not work on older
pcnet32 chips which I do not have access to. If the chip is a 79C970 or
79C965, do not try and suspend or check the link status.
I have tested with a 79C970A, 79C971, 79C972, 79C973, 79C975, 79C976,
and 79C978.
Please apply to
Don Fry wrote:
When I have some positive results, I will add the signed-off-by line and
resubmit the patch or ask for the old patch to be removed. When does
the patch need to be submitted in order to be included in 2.6.18?
A couple weeks, Linus posted that he won't be back until towards the en
On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 12:01:34AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Don Fry wrote:
> >I noticed this morning that I had the polarity wrong in my patch
> >yesterday for older chips in the pcnet32_suspend routine. Here is the
> >correct patch to test.
> >
> >>A change I made for 2.6.17 and another for 2.
Don Fry wrote:
I noticed this morning that I had the polarity wrong in my patch
yesterday for older chips in the pcnet32_suspend routine. Here is the
correct patch to test.
A change I made for 2.6.17 and another for 2.6.18 do not work on older
pcnet32 chips which I do not have access to. Plea
I noticed this morning that I had the polarity wrong in my patch
yesterday for older chips in the pcnet32_suspend routine. Here is the
correct patch to test.
> A change I made for 2.6.17 and another for 2.6.18 do not work on older
> pcnet32 chips which I do not have access to. Please test this p
A change I made for 2.6.17 and another for 2.6.18 do not work on older
pcnet32 chips which I do not have access to. Please test this patch if
you have access to a 79C970, 79C974, or 79C965 (VLB) version of the
pcnet32 and let me know if it solves any problems. I have tested with a
79C970A, 79C971
