From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 12 Jun 2001 20:51:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 12 Jun 2001 20:51:32 -0400 Received: from cx97923-a.phnx3.az.home.com ([24.9.112.194]:23254 "EHLO grok.yi.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 12 Jun 2001 20:51:22 -0400 Message-ID: <3B26B8FC.106FBA53@candelatech.com> Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 17:51:08 -0700 From: Ben Greear Organization: Candela Technologies X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.2-2 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ken Brownfield CC: Florin Andrei , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.2.19: eepro100 and cmd_wait issues In-Reply-To: <200106121921.OAA05009@asooo.flowerfire.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Ken Brownfield wrote: > OT: does anyone know what the current state of the Tulip driver is and > if there is good hardware out there? SMC left Tulip and went through at > least two other chipsets, so the only Tulip card I could find as of a > couple of years ago was Digital's. But it was astonishingly expensive > and not clearly supported by the Linux driver. The current state seems to be 'BUSTED', at least for the cards that I am trying (ZNYX 4-port, D-LINK 4-port). (I'm using the 2.4 drivers, btw.) However, I'm hoping that it will be fixed soon, because the D-LINK 4-port is very cheap compared to other 4-ports out there, and in fact I haven't found a 4-port card that is NOT tulip based (please let me know if you have 4-port suggestions!) Other than one really old EEPRO card I have, the EEPRO cards seem to be very stable, fast, and feature-complete. Ben -- Ben Greear President of Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com ScryMUD: http://scry.wanfear.com http://scry.wanfear.com/~greear