Re: different eth0 messages

Clint Marek (clintm@icsi.net)
Wed, 15 May 1996 16:17:06 -0700

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Philip Blundell: "Re: 1.99.4 compile warnings and modules"
Previous message: Albert Cahalan: "Re: CONFIG_RANDOM (compromise?)"
Maybe in reply to: Sheldon E. Newhouse: "different eth0 messages"

Sheldon E. Newhouse wrote:
>
> I am running 1.99.4 with a WD8013 as eth0.
>
> On boot up, I get the message
>
> wd.c:v1.10 9/23/94 Donald Becker (becker@cesdis.gsfc.nasa.gov)
> eth0: WD80x3 at 0x300, 00 00 C0 59 F2 80 WD8013, IRQ 10, shared memory at 0xdc000-0xdffff.
>
> But ifconfig gives
>
> eth0 Link encap:10Mbps Ethernet HWaddr 00:00:C0:59:F2:80
> inet addr:35.8.158.242 Bcast:35.8.158.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
> UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
> RX packets:315 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0
> TX packets:234 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0
> Interrupt:10 Base address:0x310 Memory:dc000-e0000
>
> So, one gives 0x300 as base address and the other as 0x310.
> Don't notice any performance problem though

Also notice the shared memory difference (although not much different!):
0xdc000-0xdffff versus 0xdc000-oxe0000.

Clint

Next message: Philip Blundell: "Re: 1.99.4 compile warnings and modules"
Previous message: Albert Cahalan: "Re: CONFIG_RANDOM (compromise?)"
Maybe in reply to: Sheldon E. Newhouse: "different eth0 messages"