2.6.7 kernel boot-time configuration of a non-modular tulip driver

From: Bruce Janson (bruce_at_it.usyd.edu.au)
Date: 07/31/04

  • Next message: Steve French: "Re: uid of user who mounts" 
    Date:	Sun, 01 Aug 2004 00:48:22 +1000
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

    I have a linux 2.6.7 kernel which contains a compiled-in tulip driver.
    I would like to be able to boot the kernel with parameters that
    will allow control of the tulip device. On some ethernet devices
    this used to be possible via (something like):

      ether=0,0,1,0,eth0

    which would pass the four numeric parameters (as, I think, dev->irq,
    dev->ioaddr, dev->mem_start and dev->mem_end) to the net driver that
    controlled eth0. A convention adopted by some net drivers then allowed
    dev->mem_start to be interpretted as a set of flags that would control
    device characteristics (e.g. full-duplex vs half-duplex mode).
    In .../linux-2.6.7/drivers/net/tulip/tulip_core.c:1587:

      if (dev->mem_start & MEDIA_MASK)
        tp->default_port = dev->mem_start & MEDIA_MASK;

    suggests that this might still work. However, I have been unable
    to force dev->mem_start in that driver to become non-zero via any
    kernel boot-time parameters. My limited understanding of the code
    that precedes the above lines in that file suggests that the "dev"
    structure is not what it used to be...

    ../linux-2.6.7/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt:402 still
    mentions "ether=..." but marks it as obsolete, replaced by
    the equivalent "netdev=...". Elsewhere in that file, the entry
    for "netdev=..." describes what appears to be the functionality
    that I seek.

    So, is it still possible to perform the same sort of control
    operations on a tulip driver via kernel boot-time parameters
    as one can do via module load-time parameters? If so, how?
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  • Next message: Steve French: "Re: uid of user who mounts"

    Relevant Pages

    • tulip initialization?
      ... I've got a NIC that uses the tulip driver but i have a strange problem. ... However, with the same box with a 2.6.12 kernel, the box is booted, the ... are correctly setup and the power/activity LEDs are lit at the back of ...
      (comp.os.linux.networking)
    • Re: tulip initialization?
      ... > I've got a NIC that uses the tulip driver but i have a strange problem. ... > With a 2.0.39 kernel in the same box, the box is booted, the tulip module ... DEC chipsets for a long time (since the 2.2. ... Not to have been a dupe, that will have been my best possesion, my best ...
      (comp.os.linux.networking)
    • Re: RH9 network problem
      ... >> Thanks for the help, it showed some odd things, like the kernel was not ... have a Netgear FA310 and it uses a tulip driver but RH9 lists that under ...
      (comp.os.linux.networking)
    • Re: MAC 00:4C:69:6E:75:79
      ... tulip driver when it can't find an EEPROM on the network card. ... driver and kernel this is? ...
      (comp.os.linux.networking)
    • Re: Fw: signed kernel modules?
      ... Why is the kernel more trustable than a kernel module? ... >> without the need for this patch. ... The ultimate goal is to control what you put ... Even the names of contributors have been ...
      (Linux-Kernel)