ok i have a 5709 somewhere i can work on.
dlg On 15 Aug 2014, at 9:50 am, Brad Smith <b...@comstyle.com> wrote: > On 14/08/14 5:09 PM, Brad Smith wrote: >> On 13/08/14 6:42 AM, David Gwynne wrote: >>> ive had this for 2 years or so. updated to current again. >>> >>> its been tested on the following: >>> >>> bnx0 at pci4 dev 0 function 0 "Broadcom BCM5708" rev 0x12: apic 8 int 16 >>> bnx1 at pci13 dev 0 function 0 "Broadcom BCM5708" rev 0x12: apic 8 int 16 >>> bnx0: address 00:1e:4f:1b:26:53 >>> brgphy0 at bnx0 phy 1: BCM5708C 10/100/1000baseT PHY, rev. 6 >>> bnx1: address 00:1e:4f:1b:26:51 >>> brgphy1 at bnx1 phy 1: BCM5708C 10/100/1000baseT PHY, rev. 6 >>> >>> itd be nice to get tests on other variants. >>> >>> ok? >> >> This is exactly the same diff that was posted in the past >> and it wouldn't be any less broken on the BCM5709 chipsets >> now. > > Since someone said I should say what I did in a clearer manner.. > > Since the diff has not changed and was broken when it was originally > posted then it will still be broken now. > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean.
