From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from semihalf.com (semihalf.com [206.130.101.55]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B389DE0E1 for ; Thu, 14 May 2009 22:39:48 +1000 (EST) From: Piotr =?iso-8859-2?q?Zi=EAcik?= To: Grant Likely Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/12] fs_enet: Add MPC5121 FEC support. Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 14:38:22 +0200 References: <1241640919-4650-1-git-send-email-wd@denx.de> <20090506220954.5D3AF83420E8@gemini.denx.de> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Message-Id: <200905141438.23348.kosmo@semihalf.com> Cc: Wolfgang Denk , Detlev Zundel , John Rigby , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Scott Wood List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Thursday 07 May 2009 00:39:25 Grant Likely napisa=B3(a): > >> 512x are enabled in the same kernel? > > > > Hm... both architectures look sufficiently different to me that I > > don't see sense in trying such a thing. Do you think that needs to be > > supported? > > Yes! :-) It's not hard to do and it keeps the driver cleaner > (IMNSHO). I don't think it is quite possible at the moment due to > cache coherency issues, but with Becky's recently merged dma ops > changes it should be fixable. Could you elaborate on the cache coherency issues in MPC5121 =46EC context? Especially how these issues are related to the driver binary compatibility.=20 MPC5121 support was added to drivers/net/fs_enet. MPC52xx uses drivers/net/fec_mpc52xx.c. Do you think that creating one universal driver from these two is now possible? You said that it should be easy, however you also said that cache coherency issues makes this imposible. =2D-=20 Best Regards. Piotr Ziecik