Network adapter (Intel PRO/100 VE) issue

[K]

I'm using a 945-based motherboard with the Intel PRO/100 VE network
adapter. The driver for the adapter device seems to install
correctly, however the adapter cannot be seen from ipconfig (/all).

However, if you remove the device (devcon remove) and install it again
(via devcon rescan), "Local Area Connection 2" can be seen from
ipconfig.
The setupapi log file seems to show the same information for the
device install and all device-related information (from devcon w/
status, driverfiles, drivernodes, etc.) information is the same
between the device before removal and after the rescan.

Rebooting has no effect on the issue, but powering off the system and
restarting does allow it to be seen through ipconfig. However, after
the reseal, it will come back and the adapter cannot be seen through
ipconfig until the system is shutdown or the device is reinstalled.

Any thoughts?

Kris

 

[K]

Returning to this issue again today, I have the following to add:
After startup, I can see the device through snetcfg (snetcfg -v -s a)
and no problems are listed from devcon for the device.
- Executing devcon restart "PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_27DC*" will restart the
device and it will show up from ipconfig, I can address it with netsh,
etc.
- Executing devcon (or a batch script containing the command) from a
FBA Generic Command at phase 12001 to restart the device (an attempt
at a hack for it) does not work.

The component used for the network adapter is the same component used
on another image (for another motherboard), with no issues.

Any ideas or suggestions as to where to look?

Thanks in advance,
Kris

 

[KM]

Kris,

You may be running into a timing issue.
How about adding a timeout or a pause statement in the batch script you are
running at FBA? Then you can see what's going on there and whether you can
issue the right devcon command at the right time.

Regards,
KM

 

[K]

KM,

A significant delay does help on the pre-reseal side of things. I am
at a point now where I have a working image. I am still curious of
why the network connection was never created in the first place.

Thanks for the suggestion.
Kris