From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 17:25:37 +0200
Subject: [U-Boot-Users]
	=?iso-8859-1?q?=5BPATCH=5D_Add_mechanisms_for_CPU_?=
	=?iso-8859-1?q?and=09board-specific_Ethernet_initialization?=
In-Reply-To: <484E9AD9.2060802@ruby.dti.ne.jp>
References: <1213086567-29194-1-git-send-email-biggerbadderben@gmail.com>
	<f8328f7c0806100653v1a4d632dv397d0d06696198f4@mail.gmail.com>
	<484E9AD9.2060802@ruby.dti.ne.jp>
Message-ID: <200806101725.37247.sr@denx.de>
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 Tuesday 10 June 2008, Shinya Kuribayashi wrote:
> >> Shouldn't this be the other way around?
> >>
> >> +       if (board_eth_init(bis) < 0)
> >> +               eth_eth_init(bis);
> >>
> >> So that the board init routine can "overwrite" the cpu init version.
> >
> > Yeah, I think you're right.  If board_eth_init() exists, it gets
> > highest priority.
>
> Just wondered, does that mean we could only have either cpu_eth_init or
> board_eth_init at a time?

Not really. board_eth_init() could call cpu_eth_init() if necessary.

Best regards,
Stefan

=====================================================================
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80  Email: office at denx.de
=====================================================================