Re: maintainers/users of de(4), lmc(4) ?

[Izumi Tsutsui <tsutsui%ceres.dti.ne.jp@localhost>]

> I wonder if/how many of these problems with tlp(4) are fixed by
> re-applying Chris Gilbert's patches to mii_bitbang.c, or else by making
> analogous changes to tlp(4)'s bitbang routines?

IMO, we should refer specifications of MII and I2C before putting
random fixes.

I wonder if the problem on cats also happend on other machines like i386.
As I wrote in the thread in port-cats archive, my 21140A worked fine
without problem on cats.
(unfortunately my cats board was dead six years ago)

I had a trouble when I tried fxp(4) on cats while it worked fine on i386,
and adding a more delay fixed the problem.
http://cvsweb.NetBSD.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/sys/dev/ic/i82557.c#rev1.33

mii_bitbang.c also uses delay(9) to generate clock plus,
so I wonder how delay(9) is/was implemented on cats.

From the viewpoint of hardware design, if the board has improper
pull up registers on I2C bus lines, it might also require
more delay for clock plus.
---
Izumi Tsutsui