[U-Boot] [PATCH] [83xx] Adds two more ethernet interface to 83xx

Kim Phillips
2008-09-25T19:50:35Z

On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 08:53:24 -0400
richardretanubun <richardretanubun@ruggedcom.com> wrote:

> Added for convenience for other platforms that uses MPC8360 (has 8 UCC).
> 6 eth interface is chosen because the platform I am using combines
> UCC1&2 and UCC3&4 as gigEth and the other 4 UCC as 10/100 Eth.
>
> - Richard
>
> From: Richard Retanubun <RichardRetanubun@RugggedCom.com>
> Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 17:21:47 -0400
> Subject: [PATCH] Add two more ethernet interface for 83XX
> Signed-off-by: Richard Retanubun <RichardRetanubun@ruggedcom.com>

Unless you're sending a patch on someone else's behalf, you don't need
the From:, Date:, and Subject: lines above, esp. since your From email
does not match your S-o-b email. Please also omit the "- Richard" from
the git commit part of the patch; if you want say something in addition
to the commit message, put it below the '---' line..

> ---

..i.e, here.

> README | 3 ++
> common/cmd_bdinfo.c | 17 +++++++++++++++-
> common/env_common.c | 6 +++++
> common/env_embedded.c | 6 +++++
> cpu/mpc83xx/fdt.c | 3 +-
> drivers/qe/uec.c | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> include/asm-ppc/u-boot.h | 6 +++++
> lib_ppc/board.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> net/eth.c | 6 +++++
> tools/env/fw_env.c | 6 +++++
> 10 files changed, 128 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

just because 83xx is the first user doesn't mean it has to go
through the 83xx tree. This patch is really not 83xx specific at all
and should probably go through net (Ben Warren) if not WD himself.

Having said that, this patch does transcend 4 subsystem areas, so if
Ben/gvb/WD want to ack/sign off on it, I can handle pushing this
upstream.

> diff --git a/README b/README
> index ccd839c..8802304 100644
> --- a/README
> +++ b/README
> @@ -1095,8 +1095,11 @@ The following options need to be configured:
>
> - Ethernet address:
> CONFIG_ETHADDR
> + CONFIG_ETH1ADDR
> CONFIG_ETH2ADDR

hmm..historically ETHADDR has been the implicit ETH1ADDR. Did you mean
to s/ETHADDR/ETH1ADDR/ ? if so, you'd need a better justification and
a much larger patch. Otherwise, please don't do this; add a
CONFIG_ETH6ADDR below instead.

> CONFIG_ETH3ADDR
> + CONFIG_ETH4ADDR
> + CONFIG_ETH5ADDR
>
> Define a default value for Ethernet address to use
> for the respective Ethernet interface, in case this
> diff --git a/common/cmd_bdinfo.c b/common/cmd_bdinfo.c
> index f4d9d40..67cc64f 100644
> --- a/common/cmd_bdinfo.c
> +++ b/common/cmd_bdinfo.c
> @@ -91,11 +91,12 @@ int do_bdinfo ( cmd_tbl_t *cmdtp, int flag, int argc, char *argv[])
> print_str ("pevfreq", strmhz(buf, bd->bi_pevfreq));
> #endif
>
> +#if defined(CONFIG_HAS_ETH0)
> puts ("ethaddr =");
> for (i=0; i<6; ++i) {
> printf ("%c%02X", i ? ':' : ' ', bd->bi_enetaddr[i]);
> }
> -
> +#endif

how is the above change relevant to the patch subject?

Thanks,

Kim