From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.aruba.it (mxaruba.aruba.it [62.149.128.10]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1CD13679E9 for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2006 02:37:23 +1100 (EST) Message-ID: <20060307153716.1130.qmail@mx1.aruba.it> References: <20060307131500.3467.qmail@mx1.aruba.it> <20060307165522.7936fd7b@vitb.ru.mvista.com> In-Reply-To: <20060307165522.7936fd7b@vitb.ru.mvista.com> From: "antonio.dibacco" To: linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org Subject: Re: fs_enet on 2.4 and 8xx_immap Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 15:37:16 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1" List-Id: Linux on Embedded PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , 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" 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