* 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.