FRITZ!Card DSL PCI not supported on 64bit?

I was very disappointed to find that openSUSE 11.0 won’t recognize
my FRITZ!Card DSL PCI ISDN/DSL adapter, which was still recognized
by openSUSE 10.3. The list of hardware to select from only offers
the SL and 2.0 variants, not the original version I have.

Now it comes to my mind that I had installed the 32 bit version of
10.3, while the 11.0 retail DVD automatically chose x86-64 arch,
ie. a 64 bit install. Is it possible that this is the reason, and
by manually selecting a 32 bit install I get back support for the
card? Is there a way to find out for sure before I redo the entire
installation?

Thanks,
Tilman

Tilman Schmidt wrote:
> I was very disappointed to find that openSUSE 11.0 won’t recognize
> my FRITZ!Card DSL PCI ISDN/DSL adapter, which was still recognized
> by openSUSE 10.3. The list of hardware to select from only offers
> the SL and 2.0 variants, not the original version I have.
>
> Now it comes to my mind that I had installed the 32 bit version of
> 10.3, while the 11.0 retail DVD automatically chose x86-64 arch,
> ie. a 64 bit install. Is it possible that this is the reason, and
> by manually selecting a 32 bit install I get back support for the
> card? Is there a way to find out for sure before I redo the entire
> installation?

To my knowledge, any driver present in a 32-bit kernel is also present
in the 64-bit version.

What is the name of the module for your ISDN device in 10.3?

What does the command ‘lspci -n’ show for the interface?

Larry

Larry Finger schrieb:
> Tilman Schmidt wrote:
>> I was very disappointed to find that openSUSE 11.0 won’t recognize
>> my FRITZ!Card DSL PCI ISDN/DSL adapter, which was still recognized
>> by openSUSE 10.3. The list of hardware to select from only offers
>> the SL and 2.0 variants, not the original version I have.
>>
>> Now it comes to my mind that I had installed the 32 bit version of
>> 10.3, while the 11.0 retail DVD automatically chose x86-64 arch,
>> ie. a 64 bit install. Is it possible that this is the reason, and
>> by manually selecting a 32 bit install I get back support for the
>> card? Is there a way to find out for sure before I redo the entire
>> installation?
>
> To my knowledge, any driver present in a 32-bit kernel is also present
> in the 64-bit version.

That is true for open source drivers. But AVM is one notable exception
to SUSE’s “no non-OSS drivers” policy.

> What is the name of the module for your ISDN device in 10.3?

Sorry, I don’t remember for sure. I would have to reinstall 10.3 in
order to find out. It was something starting with “fcpci” or “fcdsl”,
that much I remember.

> What does the command ‘lspci -n’ show for the interface?

lspci -n

00:00.0 0600: 1002:5950 (rev 10)
00:01.0 0604: 1002:5a3f
00:05.0 0604: 1002:5a37
00:12.0 0101: 1002:4379
00:13.0 0c03: 1002:4374
00:13.1 0c03: 1002:4375
00:13.2 0c03: 1002:4373
00:14.0 0c05: 1002:4372 (rev 11)
00:14.1 0101: 1002:4376
00:14.3 0601: 1002:4377
00:14.4 0604: 1002:4371
00:14.5 0401: 1002:4370 (rev 02)
00:18.0 0600: 1022:1100
00:18.1 0600: 1022:1101
00:18.2 0600: 1022:1102
00:18.3 0600: 1022:1103
01:05.0 0300: 1002:5954
01:05.1 0380: 1002:5854
02:00.0 0200: 14e4:1677 (rev 20)
03:0a.0 0480: 1131:5402 (rev 82)
03:0b.0 0200: 10b7:9200 (rev 6c)

The card in question is the one at 03:0a.0, as shown by this lspci -v snippet:

03:0a.0 Multimedia controller: Philips Semiconductors TriMedia TM-1300 (rev 82)
Subsystem: AVM Audiovisuelles MKTG & Computer System GmbH Fritz!Card DSL
Flags: bus master, medium devsel, latency 64, IRQ 3
Memory at fc800000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=8]
Memory at fd400000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=2]

Thanks,
Tilman
[/size][/size]

On 23.06.2008 02:34, /me wrote:
> I was very disappointed to find that openSUSE 11.0 won’t recognize
> my FRITZ!Card DSL PCI ISDN/DSL adapter, which was still recognized
> by openSUSE 10.3. …] I had installed the 32 bit version of
> 10.3, while the 11.0 retail DVD automatically chose x86-64 arch,
> ie. a 64 bit install.

Ok, lacking any substantial answer I now redid the install in 32 bit,
only to find out that my problem is a combination of the two:
a) AVM never supporting that card with 64 bit kernels in the first
place (ie. only delivering a 32 bit version of their binary blob)
and
b) openSUSE dropping that driver from the distribution between 10.3
and 11.0.

In fact, YaST pretended to support the card in the 32 bit install,
telling me I just had to download a proprietary driver from AVM which
openSUSE wouldn’t distribute precisely because it was proprietary.
However it turned out it had been lying: the driver it promised me
doesn’t exist for openSUSE 11.0 and its 2.6.25 kernel. I would have
to compile the source myself, which would in turn require adapting it
to the latest in-kernel API changes.

My bad for choosing AVM in the first place, of course - and for
foolishly relying on openSUSE to follow a similar non-regression
policy as the Linux kernel itself.

Conclusion: I advise

  • all owners of the original FRITZ!card DSL to stay with 10.3 and
    32 bit kernels until they can replace the card, and
  • everybody not to buy hardware without really open-source drivers
    (preferably in-kernel) even from seemingly Linux-friendly
    companies, because their support can be dropped at any time
    without notice (just as with Windows).

HTH
T.

What?

How exactly is it again SuSEs fault that the driver provider has neglected to update their driver in accordance to new kernels? Since it was never part of the mainline kernel tree, do you expect the distribution developers to patch every single non-kernel driver to work?

I spent a good 30-45 minutes hacking the Attansic L2 driver to work on the newest kernel - guess if Atheros has fixed their driver to work on the new kernel (which they had plenty of time to do since the changes have been known for months and months). I guess I should blame SuSE for not fixing it for me - oh wait…

Chrysantine schrieb:
> How exactly is it again SuSEs fault that the driver provider has
> neglected to update their driver in accordance to new kernels?

That is not SuSE’s fault, nor did I suggest that.

> Since it
> was never part of the mainline kernel tree, do you expect the
> distribution developers to patch every single non-kernel driver to
> work?

No.

> I spent a good 30-45 minutes hacking the Attansic L2 driver to work on
> the newest kernel - guess if Atheros has fixed their driver to work on
> the new kernel (which they had plenty of time to do since the changes
> have been known for months and months). I guess I should blame SuSE for
> not fixing it for me - oh wait…

Not for that, no.

So what is SuSE’s fault, you ask?

Not admitting clearly that the card isn’t supported anymore is.

I would have no problem with a notice somewhere: “This card is currently
not supported because there is no in-kernel driver and the vendor hasn’t
updated the out-of-tree driver to work with the current kernel.”
Not even with: “This card is not supported anymore because there is no
in-tree driver, period.” But even in the openSUSE help fora nobody knew
the card wasn’t supported anymore, leaving me to guess why I couldn’t
find a way to configure it. (Which led to my posting here.)

Still, even silently dropping it from the supported hardware list in
YaST would have been better than sending me on a wild goose chase for a
driver that doesn’t exist.

Sorry for criticising SuSE, I know that Isn’t Done, but sometimes …


Tilman Schmidt t.schmidt@phoenixsoftware.de
Phoenix Software GmbH www.phoenixsoftware.de
Adolf-Hombitzer-Str. 12 Amtsgericht Bonn HRB 2934
53227 Bonn, Germany Geschäftsführer: W. Grießl

There are THOUSANDS of devices that are supported - keeping a track of every single vendor out there is ludicrous to even expect - especially when the device drivers are not GPL.

If you want to complain to someone - perhaps you should complain to the company who manufactured the device?

Chrysantine schrieb:
> Tilman Schmidt;1831009 Wrote:
>> Not admitting clearly that the card isn’t supported anymore is.
> There are THOUSANDS of devices that are supported - keeping a track of
> every single vendor out there is ludicrous to even expect - especially
> when the device drivers are not GPL.

SuSE used to be rather good at that, especially in the field of ISDN
adapters. In fact, they used to produce the single best distribution
for ISDN use. But perhaps you’re right, and it’s ludicrous to expect
them to maintain that standard.

> If you want to complain to someone - perhaps you should complain to the
> company who manufactured the device?

Oh good grief, I thought we OSS people were above the finger-pointing
game. :slight_smile:

Seriously, I prefer complaining to those who can actually change things:
to AVM about the non-GPL, out-of-tree driver still not updated for
kernel 2.6.25 when 2.6.26 is nearly out - and to SUSE about YaST’s
misleading messages. Hope that’s alright by you.


Tilman Schmidt t.schmidt@phoenixsoftware.de
Phoenix Software GmbH www.phoenixsoftware.de
Adolf-Hombitzer-Str. 12 Amtsgericht Bonn HRB 2934
53227 Bonn, Germany Geschäftsführer: W. Grießl