From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sdcmail02.amcc.com (sdcmail02.amcc.com [198.137.200.73]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "Messaging Gateway Appliance Demo Cert", Issuer "Messaging Gateway Appliance Demo Cert" (not verified)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7FD52DE1C7 for ; Wed, 8 Apr 2009 02:48:03 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <49DB83BA.3080807@amcc.com> Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2009 09:47:54 -0700 From: Feng Kan MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eddie Dawydiuk Subject: Re: AMCC 440EP phy detection References: <49DB8033.1090908@embeddedarm.com> In-Reply-To: <49DB8033.1090908@embeddedarm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi Eddie: Are you able to ping in u-boot? Sounded like you were only pinging in linux. I would try the mii command in uboot. It seems like it detected the phys. Try enable the loopbacks at the different stages to see if the traffic is returning. This excerise is much easier in uboot than linux. Feng Kan AMCC Software Eddie Dawydiuk wrote: > Hello, > > I'm working on a board based on the Yosemite AMCC 440EP eval board. I'm having > some difficulty getting both network interfaces working. The first problem I > found is the ibm_newemac driver was detecting the two phys at address 0 and 1 > where we have them wired for addresses 1 and 3. As a result I hardcoded the > phy-address in the dts file. I then found I was able to receive and send data on > eth1(phy-address 3) without incident. Although I found eth0 can receive data but > I see no packets being transmitted(using a packet sniffer) and I see no > indication from a software standpoint of any transmit failures. We are using > Micrel KSZ8041FTL phys(RMII mode) where the Yosemite board used Micrel KS8721BL > phys. I've reviewed the schematic and it appears both phys are connected > identically and I've seen this same failure on multiple boards. I thought the > fact that the driver detected a phy at address 0 might be a clue, but I can't > make much of the clue. So I thought I'd post this info in the hopes someone else > might have run into a similar problem or have a suggestion. > >