Svethlana vs Ethernat driver difference

News, Support and Development discussions relating to SuperVidel.

Moderators: Mug UK, [ProToS], lp, moondog/.tSCc., instream, Moderator Team, Nature

Post Reply
mikro
Hardware Guru
Hardware Guru
Posts: 2170
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2005 11:11 am
Location: Kosice, Slovakia
Contact:

Svethlana vs Ethernat driver difference

Post by mikro »

I'm curious -- are these drivers the same? I'm asking because there have been some changes made to ethernat.xif in the FreeMiNT source tree ('ported' there by me years ago) and there's no source code to svethan.xif available so it's not clear whether the svethlana driver can benefit from those changes or not.

alanh
Hardware Guru
Hardware Guru
Posts: 1384
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 9:01 pm
Location: North Wales, UK

Re: Svethlana vs Ethernat driver difference

Post by alanh »

No, the svethlana is implemented in the FPGA, so it's proprietary as far as I know. The ethernat uses the 91C111 ethernet chip.
Falcon CT60, Falcon CT63 x2, TT x3, MegaST x2, MegaSTE x2, STFM x2, STE x2, STacy, STBook, (Dead) Hades 060, Milan 060, T40.

User avatar
shoggoth
Nature
Nature
Posts: 1004
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 9:21 am
Location: Halmstad, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Svethlana vs Ethernat driver difference

Post by shoggoth »

afaik sources will be available, it's just a matter of time
Ain't no space like PeP-space.

instream
Nature
Nature
Posts: 175
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 9:08 am
Location: Göteborg, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Svethlana vs Ethernat driver difference

Post by instream »

The ethernat driver was used as a starting point for the Svethlana driver. Its MAC resides in the SV FPGA, and is quite different from the 91C111. Accessing the registers of the Svethlana MAC is a lot easier than the 91C111 so the svethlana source code should be easier to read. We have the source code somewhere here and it really should be part of the official FreeMint source tree. Keep forgetting to send it in though... :roll:

Post Reply

Return to “SuperVidel”