From: Nate Case <ncase@xes-inc.com>
To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org>
Cc: Andy Fleming <afleming@freescale.com>, netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PHYLIB: Add BCM5482 PHY support
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 17:45:50 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1201736751.12444.176.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64N.0801300936040.20317@blysk.ds.pg.gda.pl>
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 09:51 +0000, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> > +static struct phy_driver bcm5482_driver = {
> > + .phy_id = 0x0143bcb0,
> > + .phy_id_mask = 0xfffffff0,
>
> Please check formatting above and also I am a bit curious as to why the
> ID is so different from the other ones -- the number is meant to be based
> on the OUI assigned to the manufacturer. Otherwise your addition is fine.
I'll re-submit with the formatting fixed.
I can't figure out why the ID is so different from the others, but I did
double-check it and test it on real hardware.
For what it's worth, I've found a lot of inconsistency in these ID
values. For example, the chips with ID1 == 0x0020 seem to use the wrong
set of OUI bits (22:7 instead of 21:6), while others (BCM5221) with ID1
== 0x0040 do it properly conforming to the IEEE standard.
I can't figure out how they got the ID values for the BCM5482. If you
extract the OUI from 0x0143bcb0, you get 0x0050ef (which the *BSD guys
list as an alternate "mangled" Broadcom OUI). The BCM5787 and BCM5755
also seem to share this same ID formula with the BCM5482.
- Nate Case <ncase@xes-inc.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-01-30 23:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-01-29 16:19 [PATCH] PHYLIB: Add BCM5482 PHY support Nate Case
2008-01-30 9:51 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2008-01-30 23:45 ` Nate Case [this message]
2008-02-01 18:41 ` Jeff Garzik
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1201736751.12444.176.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=ncase@xes-inc.com \
--cc=afleming@freescale.com \
--cc=macro@linux-mips.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).