From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 13:33:06 +1000 From: David Gibson To: Scott Wood Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/20] bootwrapper: Add TARGET_HAS_ETHn tests to ppcboot.h. Message-ID: <20070821033306.GV15469@localhost.localdomain> References: <20070820173920.GA30546@ld0162-tx32.am.freescale.net> <20070820173952.GF30562@ld0162-tx32.am.freescale.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20070820173952.GF30562@ld0162-tx32.am.freescale.net> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, paulus@samba.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, Aug 20, 2007 at 12:39:52PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: > U-boots more recent than when ppcboot.h was forked allow the board config > file to enable additional ethernet ports explicitly, rather than > using a hardcoded list of targets. This allows bootwrapper platform > files to do the same. > > Fortunately, nothing after the ethernet addresses is of interest to > cuboot platforms, so the inevitable mismatches won't be too > catastrophic. Good grief. Increases my already considerable wonderment at the fact that anyone ever thought bd_t was an acceptable way of passing data to the OS. > Signed-off-by: Scott Wood I can't say I'm thrilled at having two basically incompatible ways of specifying the layout of this vital structure, but bd_t is so fscked by design anyway, what's one more hack for convenience. Acked-by: David Gibson -- David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson