Re: Choice of sis(4) versus vr(4) ?

[Lars Noodén]

On 7/18/17, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2017-07-17, Lars Noodén wrote:
>> I'm looking to refurbish an old device and will probably add a network
>> card to it.  Are there any reasons based on the current drivers or the
>> hardware itself to choose sis(4) or vr(4) over one or the other on
>> i386 -curren?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Lars
>
> Staying within these drivers, the VT6105 version of vr(4) is the better
> choice. Can't you find an old intel fxp(4) instead though?
>

Thanks.  It took me a while and due to various constraints (mostly not
technical) that machine ended up getting restored with vr(4)
interfaces.

/Lars

OpenBSD 6.2-beta (GENERIC) #117: Fri Sep  8 11:53:45 MDT 2017
dera...@i386.openbsd.org:/usr/src/sys/arch/i386/compile/GENERIC
cpu0: Geode(TM) Integrated Processor by AMD PCS ("AuthenticAMD"
586-class) 500 MHz
cpu0: FPU,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,CX8,SEP,PGE,CMOV,CFLUSH,MMX,MMXX,3DNOW2,3DNOW
real mem  = 536363008 (511MB)
avail mem = 512065536 (488MB)
mpath0 at root
scsibus0 at mpath0: 256 targets
mainbus0 at root
bios0 at mainbus0: date 20/70/03, BIOS32 rev. 0 @ 0xfac40
pcibios0 at bios0: rev 2.0 @ 0xf/0x1
pcibios0: pcibios_get_intr_routing - function not supported
pcibios0: PCI IRQ Routing information unavailable.
pcibios0: PCI bus #1 is the last bus
bios0: ROM list: 0xc8000/0xa800
cpu0 at mainbus0: (uniprocessor)
mtrr: K6-family MTRR support (2 registers)
amdmsr0 at mainbus0
pci0 at mainbus0 bus 0: configuration mode 1 (bios)
0:20:0: io address conflict 0x6100/0x100
0:20:0: io address conflict 0x6200/0x200
pchb0 at pci0 dev 1 function 0 "AMD Geode LX" rev 0x33
glxsb0 at pci0 dev 1 function 2 "AMD Geode LX Crypto" rev 0x00: RNG AES
vr0 at pci0 dev 6 function 0 "VIA VT6105M RhineIII" rev 0x96: irq 11,
address 00:00:24:cb:a9:24
ukphy0 at vr0 phy 1: Generic IEEE 802.3u media interface, rev. 3: OUI
0x004063, model 0x0034
vr1 at pci0 dev 7 function 0 "VIA VT6105M RhineIII" rev 0x96: irq 5,
address 00:00:24:cb:a9:25
ukphy1 at vr1 phy 1: Generic IEEE 802.3u media interface, rev. 3: OUI
0x004063, model 0x0034
vr2 at pci0 dev 8 function 0 "VIA VT6105M RhineIII" rev 0x96: irq 9,
address 00:00:24:cb:a9:26
ukphy2 at vr2 phy 1: Generic IEEE 802.3u media interface, rev. 3: OUI
0x004063, model 0x0034
vr3 at pci0 dev 9 function 0 "VIA VT6105M RhineIII" rev 0x96: irq 12,
address 00:00:24:cb:a9:27
ukphy3 at vr3 phy 1: Generic IEEE 802.3u media interface, rev. 3: OUI
0x004063, model 0x0034
ppb0 at pci0 dev 14 function 0 "TI PCI2250" rev 0x02
pci1 at ppb0 bus 1
vr4 at pci1 dev 0 function 0 "VIA VT6105M RhineIII" rev 0x96: irq 10,
address 00:00:24:d1:fa:50
ukphy4 at vr4 phy 1: Generic IEEE 802.3u media interface, rev. 3: OUI
0x004063, model 0x0034
vr5 at pci1 dev 1 function 0 "VIA VT6105M RhineIII" rev 0x96: irq 6,
address 00:00:24:d1:fa:51
ukphy5 at vr5 phy 1: Generic IEEE 802.3u media interface, rev. 3: OUI
0x004063, model 0x0034
vr6 at pci1 dev 2 function 0 "VIA VT6105M RhineIII" rev 0x96: irq 10,
address 00:00:24:d1:fa:52
ukphy6 at vr6 phy 1: Generic IEEE 802.3u media interface, rev. 3: OUI
0x004063, model 0x0034
vr7 at pci1 dev 3 function 0 "VIA VT6105M RhineIII" rev 0x96: irq 6,
address 00:00:24:d1:fa:53
ukphy7 at vr7 phy 1: Generic IEEE 802.3u media interface, rev. 3: OUI
0x004063, model 0x0034
ral0 at pci0 dev 17 function 0 "Ralink RT2561S" rev 0x00: irq 15,
address 00:12:0e:61:54:68
ral0: MAC/BBP RT2561C, RF RT5225
glxpcib0 at pci0 dev 20 function 0 "AMD CS5536 ISA" rev 0x03: rev 3,
32-bit 3579545Hz timer, watchdog, gpio, i2c
gpio0 at glxpcib0: 32 pins
iic0 at glxpcib0
pciide0 at pci0 dev 20 function 2 "AMD CS5536 IDE" rev 0x01: DMA,
channel 0 wired to compatibility, channel 1 wired to compatibility
wd0 at pciide0 channel 0 drive 0: 
wd0: 1-sector PIO, LBA48, 3825MB, 7835184 sectors
wd1 at pciide0 channel 0 drive 1: 
wd1: 1-sector PIO, LBA, 3823MB, 7831152 sectors
wd0(pciide0:0:0): using PIO mode 4, Ultra-DMA mode 2
wd1(pciide0:0:1): using PIO mode 4, Ultra-DMA mode 2
pciide0: channel 1 ignored (disabled)
ohci0 at pci0 dev 21 function 0 "AMD CS5536 USB" rev 0x02: irq 7,
version 1.0, legacy support
ehci0 at pci0 dev 21 function 1 "AMD CS5536 USB" rev 0x02: irq 7
usb0 at ehci0: USB revision 2.0
uhub0 at usb0 configuration 1 interface 0 "AMD EHCI root hub" rev
2.00/1.00 addr 1
isa0 at glxpcib0
isadma0 at isa0
com0 at isa0 port 0x3f8/8 irq 4: ns16550a, 16 byte fifo
com0: console
com1 at isa0 port 0x2f8/8 irq 3: ns16550a, 16 byte fifo
pckbc0 at isa0 port 0x60/5 irq 1 irq 12
pckbc0: unable to establish interrupt for irq 12
pckbd0 at pckbc0 (kbd slot)
wskbd0 at pckbd0: console keyboard
pcppi0 at isa0 port 0x61
spkr0 at pcppi0
nsclpcsio0 at isa0 port 0x2e/2: NSC PC87366 rev 9: GPIO VLM TMS
gpio1 at nsclpcsio0: 29 pins
npx0 at isa0 port 0xf0/16: reported by CPUID; using exception 16
usb1 at ohci0: USB revision 1.0
uhub1 at usb1 configuration 1 interface 0 "AMD OHCI root hub" rev
1.00/1.00 addr 1
vscsi0 at root
scsibus1 at vscsi0: 256 targets
softraid0 at root
scsibus2 at softraid0: 256 targets
sd0 at scsibus2 targ 1 

Re: Choice of sis(4) versus vr(4) ?

[Martijn Rijkeboer]

Hi Lars,

On 07/18/17 11:11, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2017-07-17, Lars Noodén  wrote:
>> I'm looking to refurbish an old device and will probably add a network
>> card to it.  Are there any reasons based on the current drivers or the
>> hardware itself to choose sis(4) or vr(4) over one or the other on
>> i386 -curren?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Lars
>>
>>
> 
> Staying within these drivers, the VT6105 version of vr(4) is the better
> choice. Can't you find an old intel fxp(4) instead though?

I don't know where you're from, but if you're from The Netherlands, I
still have two PCI fxp(4) cards you can have.

Kind regards,


Martijn

Re: Choice of sis(4) versus vr(4) ?

[Stuart Henderson]

On 2017-07-17, Lars Noodén  wrote:
> I'm looking to refurbish an old device and will probably add a network
> card to it.  Are there any reasons based on the current drivers or the
> hardware itself to choose sis(4) or vr(4) over one or the other on
> i386 -curren?
>
> Regards,
> Lars
>
>

Staying within these drivers, the VT6105 version of vr(4) is the better
choice. Can't you find an old intel fxp(4) instead though?

Re: Choice of sis(4) versus vr(4) ?

[Claudio Jeker]

On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 09:07:04PM +0300, Lars Noodén wrote:
> I'm looking to refurbish an old device and will probably add a network
> card to it.  Are there any reasons based on the current drivers or the
> hardware itself to choose sis(4) or vr(4) over one or the other on
> i386 -curren?
> 

They are both similarly bad. I think it would not matter which one you
use.

-- 
:wq Claudio

Choice of sis(4) versus vr(4) ?

[Lars Noodén]

I'm looking to refurbish an old device and will probably add a network
card to it.  Are there any reasons based on the current drivers or the
hardware itself to choose sis(4) or vr(4) over one or the other on
i386 -curren?

Regards,
Lars