From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 21:49:09 -0800 From: Eugene Surovegin To: Matt Porter Cc: Mark Powell , linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org, Davey , stefan.roese@esd-electronics.com Subject: Re: patch for ibm 405ep emac driver in linux-2.4.22 and 2.4.23 Message-ID: <20031225054909.GA24915@gate.ebshome.net> References: <29449.216.110.51.8.1071877375.squirrel@www.orkun.us> <1072105831.4163.15.camel@localhost.localdomain> <001d01c3c923$db2ca3c0$5100a8c0@davey> <3FE814FF.7020503@primagraphics.co.uk> <20031223101022.A23655@home.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20031223101022.A23655@home.com> Sender: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: On Tue, Dec 23, 2003 at 10:10:22AM -0700, Matt Porter wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 23, 2003 at 10:12:15AM +0000, Mark Powell wrote: > > > > Davey wrote: > > > > >Some time ago Stefan and I had reported that both ethernet interfaces > > >cannot work well together. Sorry I have lost all old mails when I > > >reinstall my computer. We have find that this problem is caused by > > >that the base address of eht1 is wrong set. Follow by my patch for > > >linux-2.4.22 and linux-2.4.23. I have test the patch and it work well. > > > > shouldn't that just be: > > This is the right way to do it, we can't put that other hack in the > kernel. If somebody verifies this patch hen we can get it in. > Matt, I checked old-OCP version of ibm405ep.c and indeed it had EMAC1_BASE there. Obviously this is a typo introduced during conversion to new OCP. I checked these definitions when Stefan first reported the problem but failed to notice this :-(. Eugene. ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/