Net.sis9 -F

QNX Newsgroups (Archives) qdn.public.qnx4
1

I can seem to get full duplex to work on the Net.sis9 driver, even when
using the -F command line switch.

My Net.sis9 is:
Net.sis9 44252 May 17 2001

Vendor ID 0x1039
Device ID 0x0900
Revision 0x2000002

Should it work?
If it should, should it be autoselected?

2

I am running the same version of the sis9 driver on one of my machines and
it selects full-duplex just fine without the -F option. My NIC is connected
to a full-duplex switch.

Previously, Bill Caroselli (Q-TPS) wrote in qdn.public.qnx4:

I can seem to get full duplex to work on the Net.sis9 driver, even when
using the -F command line switch.

My Net.sis9 is:
Net.sis9 44252 May 17 2001

Vendor ID 0x1039
Device ID 0x0900
Revision 0x2000002

Should it work?
If it should, should it be autoselected?
\

3

Mine is connected to full duplex switch too. It has an LED for FD that
lights up with every other NIC I have but this one.

Could it be that I just have a cheap motherboard implementation of the SIS
900 NIC?

“Hugh Brown” <hsbrown@qnx.com> wrote in message
news:Voyager.020502080243.9189B@node90.ott.qnx.com…

I am running the same version of the sis9 driver on one of my machines and
it selects full-duplex just fine without the -F option. My NIC is
connected
to a full-duplex switch.

Previously, Bill Caroselli (Q-TPS) wrote in qdn.public.qnx4:
I can seem to get full duplex to work on the Net.sis9 driver, even when
using the -F command line switch.

My Net.sis9 is:
Net.sis9 44252 May 17 2001

Vendor ID 0x1039
Device ID 0x0900
Revision 0x2000002

Should it work?
If it should, should it be autoselected?

\

4

The card that I have, is the same revision as yours, but that doesn’t mean
that the PHY’s are the same. It could be that the PHY on your motherboard
is different. This is not easy to debug without the hardware.

Previously, Bill Caroselli (Q-TPS) wrote in qdn.public.qnx4:

Mine is connected to full duplex switch too. It has an LED for FD that
lights up with every other NIC I have but this one.

Could it be that I just have a cheap motherboard implementation of the SIS
900 NIC?

“Hugh Brown” <> hsbrown@qnx.com> > wrote in message
news:> Voyager.020502080243.9189B@node90.ott.qnx.com> …
I am running the same version of the sis9 driver on one of my machines and
it selects full-duplex just fine without the -F option. My NIC is
connected
to a full-duplex switch.

Previously, Bill Caroselli (Q-TPS) wrote in qdn.public.qnx4:
I can seem to get full duplex to work on the Net.sis9 driver, even when
using the -F command line switch.

My Net.sis9 is:
Net.sis9 44252 May 17 2001

Vendor ID 0x1039
Device ID 0x0900
Revision 0x2000002

Should it work?
If it should, should it be autoselected?




\

5

I guess I’ll live with it the way it is. This box was a kind of a free-be
anyway. I’m just happy I can use it.

“Hugh Brown” <hsbrown@qnx.com> wrote in message
news:Voyager.020503084204.12895K@node90.ott.qnx.com…

The card that I have, is the same revision as yours, but that doesn’t mean
that the PHY’s are the same. It could be that the PHY on your motherboard
is different. This is not easy to debug without the hardware.

Previously, Bill Caroselli (Q-TPS) wrote in qdn.public.qnx4:
Mine is connected to full duplex switch too. It has an LED for FD that
lights up with every other NIC I have but this one.

Could it be that I just have a cheap motherboard implementation of the
SIS
900 NIC?

“Hugh Brown” <> hsbrown@qnx.com> > wrote in message
news:> Voyager.020502080243.9189B@node90.ott.qnx.com> …
I am running the same version of the sis9 driver on one of my machines
and
it selects full-duplex just fine without the -F option. My NIC is
connected
to a full-duplex switch.

Previously, Bill Caroselli (Q-TPS) wrote in qdn.public.qnx4:
I can seem to get full duplex to work on the Net.sis9 driver, even
when
using the -F command line switch.

My Net.sis9 is:
Net.sis9 44252 May 17 2001

Vendor ID 0x1039
Device ID 0x0900
Revision 0x2000002

Should it work?
If it should, should it be autoselected?





\