* [U-Boot] bitbang phy driver
@ 2009-08-04 20:42 Darius Augulis
2009-08-04 21:12 ` Wolfgang Denk
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Darius Augulis @ 2009-08-04 20:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
Hi all,
I see that miiphybb.c driver is used only with PPC architecture yet.
I would like to use it with ARM. Would be it reasonable to make this
driver arch independent? I have small patch and it changes defined ports
and pins with function calls, which should be provided by each CPU. I
attached this patch for RFC. If it is suitable, I may need help with
changing all > 20 PPC boards using this driver, because I don't have
experience with PPC. Would be there some volunteers willing to help? Or
please suggest other solution to make optimize this driver.
Regards,
Darius A.
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: patch-bbmii-gpio
Url: http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20090804/609f6daf/attachment.txt
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] bitbang phy driver
2009-08-04 20:42 [U-Boot] bitbang phy driver Darius Augulis
@ 2009-08-04 21:12 ` Wolfgang Denk
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Wolfgang Denk @ 2009-08-04 21:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
Dear Darius Augulis,
In message <4A789D2F.1050405@gmail.com> you wrote:
>
> I see that miiphybb.c driver is used only with PPC architecture yet.
> I would like to use it with ARM. Would be it reasonable to make this
> driver arch independent? I have small patch and it changes defined ports
> and pins with function calls, which should be provided by each CPU. I
Hm... I fail to see why such a change is needed.
> attached this patch for RFC. If it is suitable, I may need help with
> changing all > 20 PPC boards using this driver, because I don't have
> experience with PPC. Would be there some volunteers willing to help? Or
Sure. The plan (to make this architecture independent) makes a lot
sense.
...
> - MDIO_ACTIVE;
> - MDIO (1);
> + mii_mdio_active(1);
> + mii_mdio_set(1);
> for (j = 0; j < 32; j++) {
> - MDC (0);
> + mii_mdc_set(0);
> MIIDELAY;
> - MDC (1);
> + mii_mdc_set(1);
> MIIDELAY;
Why are these changes necessary?
Why cannot you simple add this to your board config file:
#define MDIO_ACTIVE mii_mdio_active(1)
#define MDIO(x) mii_mdio_set(x)
#define MDC(x) mii_mdc_set(x)
...
?
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
A year spent in artificial intelligence is enough to make one believe
in God.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-08-04 21:12 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-08-04 20:42 [U-Boot] bitbang phy driver Darius Augulis
2009-08-04 21:12 ` Wolfgang Denk
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.