From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Feb 26 13:14:15 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30F2716A4CE
	for <stable@FreeBSD.ORG>; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:14:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gidgate.gid.co.uk (gid.co.uk [194.32.164.225])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E09243D31
	for <stable@FreeBSD.ORG>; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:14:14 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from rb@gid.co.uk)
Received: (from rb@localhost)
	by gidgate.gid.co.uk (8.11.7/8.11.6) id i1QLEBm35656;
	Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:14:11 GMT
	(envelope-from rb)
Message-Id: <6.0.1.1.2.20040226204904.03d1acf8@gid.co.uk>
X-Sender: rbmail@gid.co.uk (Unverified)
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.1.1
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:14:07 +0000
To: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net>
From: Bob Bishop <rb@gid.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.0.20040226145453.06e6ae30@209.112.4.2>
References: <6.0.3.0.0.20040226131930.10513908@209.112.4.2>
 <6.0.1.1.2.20040226192403.03dddb28@gid.co.uk>
 <6.0.3.0.0.20040226145453.06e6ae30@209.112.4.2>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
cc: stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: bad em NIC or new unrecognized NIC ?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code
	<freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:14:15 -0000

At 19:57 26/2/04, Mike Tancsa wrote:

>At 02:26 PM 26/02/2004, Bob Bishop wrote:
>>Hi,
>>
>>At 18:25 26/2/04, Mike Tancsa wrote:
>>>
>>>em0: The EEPROM Checksum Is Not Valid [etc]
>>
>>FWIW I get something very similar under 5.2.1-RC2 on my shiny new 
>>ThinkPad T41, so it's likely just not recognised.
>
>Actually, I worked around the problem by swapping its location with an fxp 
>next to it.  For some reason the em does not seem to like sharing its 
>interrupt with agp0 ? The fxp seems happy enough to do it however.

Oh great. All the PCI devices on my TP are sharing int 11, but it all works 
fine under WinXP. Maybe I should try without ACPI...

--
Bob Bishop		    +44 (0)118 977 4017
rb@gid.co.uk		fax +44 (0)118 989 4254