Network driver detected from Live CD but not NanoBSD
binarybrian last edited by
I am running the NanoBSD 4GB, 2.1.2 image on an Intel-based 64bit box which uses an NVidia MCP79 nfe(4) network driver and an Intel Pro/1000 em(4) driver. Booting from the Live CD on a USB drive, both network cards are detected just fine. However, when booting from the NanoBSD image only the Intel driver (em0) is detected. Is there a hardware compatibility difference between the two image types?
I've run a diff on the dmesg.boot files from both the Live CD and NanoBSD.
There are a few minor differences between the two but the biggest difference is the lack of detection of the nfe0 driver during the NanoBSD startup.
From the Live image startup:
... 073 pci1: <acpi pci="" bus="">on pcib1 074 nfe0: <nvidia nforce="" mcp79="" networking="" adapter="">port 0xfc00-0xfc07 mem 0xfe02b000-0xfe02bfff,0xfe02a000-075 0xfe02a0ff,0xfe029000-0xfe02900f irq 23 at device 10.0 on pci0 075 miibus0: <mii bus="">on nfe0 076 rgephy0: <rtl8169s 8110s="" 8211b="" media="" interface="">PHY 3 on miibus0 077 rgephy0: none, 10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 10baseT-FDX-flow, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, 100baseTX-FDX-flow, 1000baseT, 1000baseT-master, 1000baseT-FDX, 1000baseT-FDX-master, 1000baseT-FDX-flow, 1000baseT-FDX-flow-master, auto, auto-flow 078 nfe0: [FILTER] 079 atapci0: <nvidia nforce="" mcp79="" sata300="" controller="">port 0x9f0-0x9f7,0xbf0-0xbf3,0x970-0x977,0xb70-0xb73,0xf700-0xf70f mem 0xfe026000-0xfe027fff irq 20 at device 11.0 on pci0 080 atapci0: [ITHREAD] ...</nvidia></rtl8169s></mii></nvidia></acpi>
From the NanoBSD image startup:
... 073 pci1: <acpi pci="" bus="">on pcib1 074 pci0: <network, ethernet="">at device 10.0 (no driver attached) 075 atapci0: <nvidia nforce="" mcp79="" sata300="" controller="">port 0x9f0-0x9f7,0xbf0-0xbf3,0x970-0x977,0xb70-0xb73,0xf700-0xf70f 076 mem 0xfe026000-0xfe027fff irq 20 at device 11.0 on pci0 077 atapci0: [ITHREAD] ...</nvidia></network,></acpi>
So it seems there simply is no nfe driver in the NanoBSD image? Any ideas on how I can troubleshoot this further or suggestions on how to proceed?
cmb last edited by
Drivers are the same between them. Only real functional difference is with the loader.conf(.local) settings in nano vs. full. When using nano on PC or server class hardware, you probably want loader.conf and loader.conf.local from full. Might make a difference.
binarybrian last edited by
Thanks for the tip. If the kernels are the same between the two then it must be something to do with one of the boot config files like you mention. I haven't yet figured out what is different between the two loader.conf.local files that causes the driver to not be loaded but at least gives me a good start so I don't go fishing down the wrong hole!