Re: Call for axe(4) testers.

On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 03:49:25PM +0900, Norikatsu Shigemura wrote:
 > On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 10:13:39 +0900
 > Pyun YongHyeon <pyunyh_at_gmail.com> wrote:
 > > On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 01:40:57AM +0900, Norikatsu Shigemura wrote:
 > >  > On Fri, 3 Oct 2008 14:47:56 +0900
 > >  > Pyun YongHyeon <pyunyh_at_gmail.com> wrote:
 > >  > > Attached file is fix for AX88178 USB Gigabit controller. The patch
 > >  > > removed old hack to find the correct PHY address of controller and 
 > >  > > it will affect all axe(4) controllers. If you have axe(4) hardware
 > >  > > please give it try and let me know how it goes.
 > >  > 	Oops, why vsc8211 is vitesse's instead of cicada's? :-)
 > > Because Vitesse now owns Cicada and Vitesse site clearly indicates
 > > the model name is VSC8211 single port 10/100/1000 PHY.
 > 
 > 	Yes, but phy's vendor is reported as cicada.
 > 
 > ciphy0 pnpinfo oui=0x3f1 model=0xb rev=0x1 at phyno=24
 >                       ######
 > 
 > from sys/dev/mii/miidevs
 > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
 > oui CICADA                      0x0003F1        Cicada Semiconductor
 > oui VITESSE                     0x0001c1        Vitesse Semiconductor
 > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
 > 
 > 	So vsc8211 should be set CICADA on src, but indicated VITESSE
 > 	on message.
 > 

I guess Vitesse used OUI Cicada if the PHY is based on Cicada's
design. You also have valid points on regarding OUI. I don't have
strong opions on the naming and if you prefer Cicada over Vitesse
I'll change that.

 > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
 > miibus0: <MII bus> on axe0
 > ciphy0: <Vitesse VSC8211 10/100/1000TX PHY> PHY 24 on miibus0
 > ciphy0:  10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, 1000baseT, 1000baseT-FDX, auto
 > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

-- 
Regards,
Pyun YongHyeon