From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <3E401AC9.9090703@embeddededge.com> Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2003 14:55:53 -0500 From: Dan Malek MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Rini Cc: Steven Scholz , Linuxppc-Embedded Subject: Re: was: FEC on MPC860T & race condition References: <3E395B40.9090506@imc-berlin.de> <3E39898E.5060804@embeddededge.com> <3E3A3EE9.7000608@imc-berlin.de> <20030203210959.GA7857@ip68-0-152-218.tc.ph.cox.net> <3E3F7C29.8030807@imc-berlin.de> <20030204160401.GA30936@ip68-0-152-218.tc.ph.cox.net> <3E3FE6D0.1010600@imc-berlin.de> <20030204193224.GB3522@ip68-0-152-218.tc.ph.cox.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Sender: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: Tom Rini wrote: > I believe this is wrong, in that trying to udelay() here is a bad idea. I agree. All of the MII communcation is interrupt driven. This is easy and the way everything should work on the 8xx. The link interrupt is more challenging because the interrupt from that depends upon the phy type and the board design. The link interrupts are either real interrupts or managed with a timed thread. If you need to wait before installing the link interrupt (which I still don't understand why), this should be done as part of the phy discovery interrupt. For example, add an indirect function pointer and if it isn't NULL, call it at that time to do anything that must wait until the phy is discovered and initialized. Thanks. -- Dan ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/