* fs_enet on 2.4 and 8xx_immap
@ 2006-03-07 13:15 antonio.dibacco
2006-03-07 13:55 ` Vitaly Bordug
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: antonio.dibacco @ 2006-03-07 13:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linuxppc-embedded
I think that to make it work I need to update cpm8xx_t inserting the fec2
filed. Is this true? Could I use the 8xx_immap.h of a 2.6 kernel?
Bye,
Antonio.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: fs_enet on 2.4 and 8xx_immap
2006-03-07 13:15 fs_enet on 2.4 and 8xx_immap antonio.dibacco
@ 2006-03-07 13:55 ` Vitaly Bordug
2006-03-07 15:37 ` antonio.dibacco
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Vitaly Bordug @ 2006-03-07 13:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: antonio.dibacco; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 13:15:00 GMT
"antonio.dibacco" <antonio.dibacco@aruba.it> wrote:
> I think that to make it work I need to update cpm8xx_t inserting the fec2
> filed. Is this true? Could I use the 8xx_immap.h of a 2.6 kernel?
>
Not exactly. I think you can borrow the structures from 2.6, but do a triple-check that the result offsets are the same.
> Bye,
> Antonio.
> _______________________________________________
> Linuxppc-embedded mailing list
> Linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
> https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded
>
>
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: fs_enet on 2.4 and 8xx_immap
2006-03-07 13:55 ` Vitaly Bordug
@ 2006-03-07 15:37 ` antonio.dibacco
2006-03-07 15:42 ` Vitaly Bordug
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: antonio.dibacco @ 2006-03-07 15:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linuxppc-embedded
I think I will use the 8xx_immap.h borrowed from u-boot-1.1.4, it is really
similar to that of 2.4.25, with some explicit padding and fec2. Do you think
that porting fs_enet to 2.4 is it the best way to have both FECs working on
a MPC875? I don't want to use 2.6.
Bye,
Antonio.
Vitaly Bordug Scrive:
> On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 13:15:00 GMT
> "antonio.dibacco" <antonio.dibacco@aruba.it> wrote:
>
>> I think that to make it work I need to update cpm8xx_t inserting the fec2
>> filed. Is this true? Could I use the 8xx_immap.h of a 2.6 kernel?
>>
> Not exactly. I think you can borrow the structures from 2.6, but do a triple-check that the result offsets are the same.
>
>> Bye,
>> Antonio.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Linuxppc-embedded mailing list
>> Linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
>> https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Sincerely,
> Vitaly
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: fs_enet on 2.4 and 8xx_immap
2006-03-07 15:37 ` antonio.dibacco
@ 2006-03-07 15:42 ` Vitaly Bordug
2006-03-07 15:49 ` antonio.dibacco
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Vitaly Bordug @ 2006-03-07 15:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: antonio.dibacco; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 15:37:16 GMT
"antonio.dibacco" <antonio.dibacco@aruba.it> wrote:
> I think I will use the 8xx_immap.h borrowed from u-boot-1.1.4, it is really
> similar to that of 2.4.25, with some explicit padding and fec2. Do you think
> that porting fs_enet to 2.4 is it the best way to have both FECs working on
> a MPC875? I don't want to use 2.6.
>
Sounds reasonable, but I'll repeat:
fs_enet patches for 2.6 used to support 2.4 thing(via #ifdef's), it was cleaned up close to submission. IIRC, it handles 2 fecs quite great on my 885ads, so it worths to search around a bit before hacking...
> Bye,
> Antonio.
>
> Vitaly Bordug Scrive:
>
> > On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 13:15:00 GMT
> > "antonio.dibacco" <antonio.dibacco@aruba.it> wrote:
> >
> >> I think that to make it work I need to update cpm8xx_t inserting the fec2
> >> filed. Is this true? Could I use the 8xx_immap.h of a 2.6 kernel?
> >>
> > Not exactly. I think you can borrow the structures from 2.6, but do a triple-check that the result offsets are the same.
> >
> >> Bye,
> >> Antonio.
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Linuxppc-embedded mailing list
> >> Linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
> >> https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sincerely,
> > Vitaly
>
>
>
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: fs_enet on 2.4 and 8xx_immap
2006-03-07 15:42 ` Vitaly Bordug
@ 2006-03-07 15:49 ` antonio.dibacco
2006-03-07 16:18 ` Brent Cook
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: antonio.dibacco @ 2006-03-07 15:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linuxppc-embedded
Hi,
I'm a novice and I don't understand what is "IIRC". Is something that
handles the two FECs on 885ads? I knew that on 885ads the second ethernet
was realized via an SCC and not FEC. Am I wrong?
Bye,
Antonio.
Vitaly Bordug Scrive:
> On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 15:37:16 GMT
> "antonio.dibacco" <antonio.dibacco@aruba.it> wrote:
>
>> I think I will use the 8xx_immap.h borrowed from u-boot-1.1.4, it is really
>> similar to that of 2.4.25, with some explicit padding and fec2. Do you think
>> that porting fs_enet to 2.4 is it the best way to have both FECs working on
>> a MPC875? I don't want to use 2.6.
>>
> Sounds reasonable, but I'll repeat:
> fs_enet patches for 2.6 used to support 2.4 thing(via #ifdef's), it was cleaned up close to submission. IIRC, it handles 2 fecs quite great on my 885ads, so it worths to search around a bit before hacking...
>
>> Bye,
>> Antonio.
>>
>> Vitaly Bordug Scrive:
>>
>> > On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 13:15:00 GMT
>> > "antonio.dibacco" <antonio.dibacco@aruba.it> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I think that to make it work I need to update cpm8xx_t inserting the fec2
>> >> filed. Is this true? Could I use the 8xx_immap.h of a 2.6 kernel?
>> >>
>> > Not exactly. I think you can borrow the structures from 2.6, but do a triple-check that the result offsets are the same.
>> >
>> >> Bye,
>> >> Antonio.
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Linuxppc-embedded mailing list
>> >> Linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
>> >> https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Sincerely,
>> > Vitaly
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Sincerely,
> Vitaly
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: fs_enet on 2.4 and 8xx_immap
2006-03-07 15:49 ` antonio.dibacco
@ 2006-03-07 16:18 ` Brent Cook
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Brent Cook @ 2006-03-07 16:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linuxppc-embedded
On Tuesday 07 March 2006 09:49, antonio.dibacco wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm a novice and I don't understand what is "IIRC". Is something that
> handles the two FECs on 885ads? I knew that on 885ads the second ethernet
> was realized via an SCC and not FEC. Am I wrong?
>
> Bye,
> Antonio.
That is too funny! "IIRC" is an abbreviation for "if I recall"
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2006-03-07 16:34 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2006-03-07 13:15 fs_enet on 2.4 and 8xx_immap antonio.dibacco
2006-03-07 13:55 ` Vitaly Bordug
2006-03-07 15:37 ` antonio.dibacco
2006-03-07 15:42 ` Vitaly Bordug
2006-03-07 15:49 ` antonio.dibacco
2006-03-07 16:18 ` Brent Cook
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.