Re: 100BaseT Ethernet interface chips

Elroy the Seedy Impaler 23 years ago

I've used the Intel LXT972, and now I'm going to the Broadcom AC101. If your application is really cost sensitive, I'd advise looking at the Broadcom part. I got quotes for $1.80 in 1k buys.

Elroy

Ted,
>
> I am using the SMSC LAN91C111 with a Intel PXA250/255 and in
>my opinion its the next big thing since sliced bread. No complaints
>and no issues. I plan to use it in everything that I do which requires
>ethernet connectivity.
>
>Richard
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Custom embedded hardware and software. snipped-for-privacy@rcn.com
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>>
>>Has anybody used the SMSS LAN91C911 100Mbps Ethernet interface chip in
>>embedded applications?
>>
>>I've heard there may be some problems with it, but this may just be
>>grumbles.
>>
>>Any opinions would be appreciated
>>
>>Thanks in advance
>>
>>PS: I am aware of the speed implications of using fast Ethernet
>>controllers with relatively slow embedded systems.
>
>
>
>----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
>
formatting link
The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000

Newsgroups

---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Vote

ted 23 years ago

Thanks all for the replies, very useful!

I am experience an odd problem with the LAN91C111:

I can get read and write access to registers in bank 0 and 1 normally (by writing 0 and 1 into the bank address 0x0E, as per specs).

However, in order to get access to registers in bank 2 and 3 I have to write 4 and 5 into address 0x0E. Is this a known feature?? Writing 2 or 3 (as I think it should be) reads back gibberish.

And no, I don't think I have the address or data lines swapped around, I have tried various test writing and reading, even from the constant read only reagisters, and the values are read correctly (blimey, the time I have spent time checking and double checking on this!!)

Anybody any ideas what may be going on?

Thanks in advance!

Vote

Khim Bittle 23 years ago

could you please describe the configuration for the 185k byte/sec , tcip, udp, packet size, what kinda thing you are doing , I guess I would have expected it to be a little higher ? thanks KB

Vote

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required