From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ajay Bhargav <ajay.bhargav@einfochips.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 11:03:38 +0530 (IST)
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 1/3] net: Adds Fast Ethernet Controller
 driver for Armada100
In-Reply-To: <1826454834.6634.1314336622428.JavaMail.root@ahm.einfochips.com>
Message-ID: <1009978001.6657.1314336818632.JavaMail.root@ahm.einfochips.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de


----- "Mike Frysinger" <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Thursday, August 25, 2011 01:10:30 Ajay Bhargav wrote:
> > ----- "Mike Frysinger" <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, August 24, 2011 09:07:18 Ajay Bhargav wrote:
> > > > +	/* Read mac from env if available */
> > > > +	eth_getenv_enetaddr("ethaddr", dev->enetaddr);
> > > 
> > > you shouldnt need to do this.  the higher layers will take care
> of
> > > this for
> > > you when you set write_hwaddr
> > 
> > I do not have a hardware storage for MAC on my controller.
> write_hwaddr
> > is not needed for me.
> 
> ok, but you should not be touching dev->enetaddr in your registration
> 
> function.  the main net/eth.c:eth_initialize() takes care of this for
> you.
> 
> > > > +int armada100_fec_initialize()
> > > > +{
> > > > ...
> > > > +     darmdfec->regs = (void *) ARMD1_FEC_BASE;
> > > 
> > > make the reg base a parameter to armada100_fec_initialize()
> > 
> > This driver is for Armada100 series and base address is same for
> > the whole series, so i did not feel passing it as a parameter. Can
> > you please tell me if there is any specific reason for the same?
> 
> drivers should be written for the IP they control, not for specific
> SoCs or 
> boards.  and what people often start off with "this SoC only has one
> MAC so 
> screw multi-instance" quite frequently turns into "this next SoC
> supports 
> multiple MACs!".
> 
> i'm not familiar with the Armada100, or the MAC IP that is in that
> SoC, but 
> this story repeats itself constantly in the SoC world because people
> focus on 
> the one specific SoC they have in their hand and not the bigger
> picture.  
> simply witness the ARM hell that Linux is currently in and is being
> cleaned up 
> through the Linaro organization.
> -mike

Hi Mike,

I got your point.. Thanks for clearing this. I will make sure that this
kind of problem does not happen in my case :)

Regards,
Ajay