From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-in-02.arcor-online.net (mail-in-02.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.42]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mx.arcor.de", Issuer "Thawte Premium Server CA" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0487DDE30 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2007 17:40:50 +1000 (EST) In-Reply-To: <467FE6E5.1070403@freescale.com> References: <11825407952085-git-send-email-timur@freescale.com> <70d005ce549921cc56481fe0b26faaa4@kernel.crashing.org> <467FDA2C.8020607@freescale.com> <05ae4090f00e42580b7dcbf0619cc0b7@kernel.crashing.org> <467FE6E5.1070403@freescale.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v623) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: From: Segher Boessenkool Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: fix MAC address entries for 83xx, 85xx, and 86xx device trees Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 09:40:44 +0200 To: Timur Tabi Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , >> Yup, they're both marked for removal so let's just remove them >> at the same time. > > As soon as Paul creates a "for-2.6.25" branch, that's when I was > planning on doing it. Sounds like as good a time as any. >> Does the kernel provide a warning to users of too-old firmware^Wuboot >> telling them to update btw? > > Nope. The current U-Boot code updates mac-address and/or > local-mac-address, whichever ones exist. If neither exists, it > doesn't do anything. If both exists, it updates both with the same > value. This makes it DTS-agnostic, so to speak. > > The kernel looks at each of the properties and uses the first one that > has a valid MAC address. Again, this is U-Boot- and DTS-agnostic. Yeah, that's fine. I just meant the current kernel (before .25) could detect you are using a uboot that won't work after .25 anymore, and shout at the user. Would save you some bug reports ;-) > In other words, the current U-Boot and Linux code is written to not > care what the other one does. I have no plans to remove the code in > the kernel that looks for obsolete entries (I'm talking about function > of_get_mac_address), because it's "safe". Well you should remove the "address" thing, it is _not_ safe. > However, now that you mention it, I could update function > of_get_mac_address() to display a warning if it only finds the > 'address' property. Yeah exactly. > That property is definitely wrong and should never be in the DTS or > any device tree passed to the kernel. Segher