From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: marex@denx.de (Marek Vasut) Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 13:01:46 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: mx28: Skip OCOTP FEC MAC setup if in DT In-Reply-To: <20120925051424.GB27291@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net> References: <1348195214-26633-1-git-send-email-marex@denx.de> <20120925051424.GB27291@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net> Message-ID: <201209251301.46486.marex@denx.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Dear Shawn Guo, > On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 04:40:14AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: > > Currently, the kernel unconditionally adds "local-mac-address" and > > "mac-address" properties under both FEC ethernet DT nodes in case > > the update_fec_mac_prop() function is called. These properties are > > loaded with MAC address compiled from vendors OUI and a per-device > > NIC saved in OCOTP storage. > > > > Some more advanced bootloaders do augment the DT passed to the kernel > > by these properties already. In such case, it is wrong for kernel to > > override these values. > > > > Adjust the FEC MAC address loading so that in case the DT properties > > are already present in the DT passed from the bootloader, skip the > > loading from OCOTP altogether. If the DT properties are not present, > > load them from OCOTP. > > > > Note that the later case will lead to zeroed out MAC address if OCOTP > > is not programmed. This will lead to FEC not working at all. > > > > Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut > > Cc: Fabio Estevam > > Cc: Shawn Guo > > --- > > > > arch/arm/mach-mxs/mach-mxs.c | 4 ++++ > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/mach-mxs.c b/arch/arm/mach-mxs/mach-mxs.c > > index 71d47f5..3f29a52 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/mach-mxs.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-mxs/mach-mxs.c > > @@ -175,6 +175,10 @@ static void __init update_fec_mac_prop(enum mac_oui > > oui) > > > > np = of_find_compatible_node(from, NULL, "fsl,imx28-fec"); > > if (!np) > > > > return; > > > > + > > + if (of_get_property(np, "local-mac-address", NULL)) > > + continue; > > + > > The block should be put after "from" assignment below. Can you please elaborate why would that be necessary? Best regards, Marek Vasut