From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Warren Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 09:35:07 -0700 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2] Program net device MAC addresses after initializing In-Reply-To: <20100426115216.C8414C1584A@gemini.denx.de> References: <1272261030-9419-1-git-send-email-biggerbadderben@gmail.com> <20100426115216.C8414C1584A@gemini.denx.de> Message-ID: <4BD5C0BB.4040403@gmail.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hi Wolfgang, On 4/26/2010 4:52 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Ben Warren, > > In message<1272261030-9419-1-git-send-email-biggerbadderben@gmail.com> you wrote: > >> Add a new function to the eth_device struct for programming a network >> controller's hardware address. >> >> After all network devices have been initialized and the proper MAC address for >> each has been determined, make a device driver call to program the address >> into the device. Only device instances with valid unicast addresses will be >> programmed. >> > Thanks. > > >> +If Ethernet drivers implement the 'write_hwaddr' function, valid MAC addresses >> +will be programmed into hardware as part of the initialization process. This >> +may be skipped by setting the appropriate 'ethmacskip' environment variable. >> +The naming convention is as follows: >> +"eth0macskip" (=>eth0), "eth1macskip" (=>eth1) etc. >> > Would it not be more consistent to use "ethmacskip" instead of > "eth0macskip" similar to using "ethaddr" (instead of "eth0addr") ? > > I guess it depends which consistency we're going for :) We can be consistent relative to an existing variable that is itself inconsistent for historical reasons, or we can be consistent in usage of the new variable. I don't have a strong opinion either way, so will change this. > The majority of boards still has only a single Ethernet interface > anyway. > > Best regards, > > Wolfgang Denk > > regards, Ben