From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Haavard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@atmel.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 18:28:20 +0100
Subject: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH 2/2] AVR32: ATNGW100 board support
In-Reply-To: <47864D86.7020800@gmail.com>
References: <1199953497-777-1-git-send-email-hskinnemoen@atmel.com>
	<1199953497-777-2-git-send-email-hskinnemoen@atmel.com>
	<1199953497-777-3-git-send-email-hskinnemoen@atmel.com>
	<47864D86.7020800@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20080110182820.73e56a4d@siona>
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

On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 11:53:26 -0500
Ben Warren <biggerbadderben@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm not crazy about /net/eth.c calling board-specific ethernet 
> initialization routines - it should be calling the driver 
> initialization.  This file is enough of a mess as it is, and adding a 
> new entry for each board only makes it worse.  Since there's
> precedent, though, consider this

Yeah...the problem is that there are two ethernet controllers on the
AP7000 and only the board knows which one(s) to initialize. I don't
want the driver to know about such things.

> Acked-by:  Ben Warren <biggerbadderben@gmail.com>

Thanks.

> In the next release (not the one finishing in a week), what do you
> think about this:
> 
> #if defined(CONFIG_BOARD_ETH_INIT)
> 	board_eth_initialize(bis)
> #endif

I like it, but Stefan's suggestion about providing an empty, weak
function would be even better.

> Moving Ethernet initialization in general to the board (not just
> Atmel boards) would go a long way towards cleaning up the current
> mess and would provide more scalability and flexibility.

Yes, I think moving the "top-level" ethernet initialization function to
the board code would be the right thing to do. The board could then
register all the controllers, apply PHY quirks, etc. before handing
things over to the networking layer.

Haavard