From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: andy@warmcat.com (Andy Green) Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 13:34:04 +0000 Subject: [RFC PATCH 1/2] OMAP2+: add cpu id register to MAC address helper In-Reply-To: <201103251424.47141.arnd@arndb.de> References: <20110324211451.14936.39750.stgit@otae.warmcat.com> <201103251249.32578.arnd@arndb.de> <4D8C85DB.6060001@linaro.org> <201103251424.47141.arnd@arndb.de> Message-ID: <4D8C99CC.5020103@linaro.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 03/25/2011 01:24 PM, Somebody in the thread at some point said: > On Friday 25 March 2011, Andy Green wrote: >> Having a proper MAC from IEEE assigned for each interface is of course >> ideal. >> >> But even if that happened today though, on Panda there is no "board >> identity storage" to put the reserved MAC addresses in to bind it to the >> physical board. If you try to manage them on SD Card, you have the >> problem of dealing with correct MAC addresses needing putting there >> again every time it is nuked. So it doesn't in itself help in the Panda >> case. > > What I meant is computing an official MAC address from the same input > data as you already do. Unfortunately that would mean having at most 24 > bits available instead of the 44 or so bits you currently use, because > the upper half of the address then becomes fixed. > > Also it would require > 1. defining an new algorithm that computes the lower 24 bits from the > die ID in a way that minimises the chances of collision > 2. Getting an official identifier for the upper half of the address > assigned to the OMAP3/OMAP4 CPUs > 3. Documenting this method in the OMAP data sheets. I see. It would work OK then. They probably wouldn't want to blow their $1750 just on Panda though, so maybe they set 4 bits or whatever and let 20 be computed. However, the only practical advantage is that it would show up as a TI MAC in an OUI database. The "locally administered" address as used at the moment is otherwise legal in every respect AFAIK. -Andy