From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ben Warren <biggerbadderben@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 23:10:56 -0700
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] smc91xx_eeprom: Correct chip detection check.
In-Reply-To: <20100612192201.17815.3486.stgit@numalfix>
References: <20100612192201.17815.3486.stgit@numalfix>
Message-ID: <4C1F0270.1010706@gmail.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

Hi Juergen,

On 6/12/2010 12:22 PM, Juergen Kilb wrote:
> From: Juergen Kilb<j.jilb@phytec.de>
>
> The smc911x_detect function in /net/driver/net/smc911x.c
> returns a 0 if everything was ok (a chip was found) and -1 else.
> In the standalone example 'smc911x_eeprom' the return value
> of smc911x_detect is interpreted in a different way
> (0 for error, !0 as OK).
> This leads to the error that the chip will not be detected.
>
> Signed-of-by: Juergen Kilb<j.kilb@phytec.de>
> ---
>
>   examples/standalone/smc911x_eeprom.c |    2 +-
>   1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/examples/standalone/smc911x_eeprom.c b/examples/standalone/smc911x_eeprom.c
> index 104047f..cb3c131 100644
> --- a/examples/standalone/smc911x_eeprom.c
> +++ b/examples/standalone/smc911x_eeprom.c
> @@ -240,7 +240,7 @@ static void dump_eeprom(struct eth_device *dev)
>   static int smc911x_init(struct eth_device *dev)
>   {
>   	/* See if there is anything there */
> -	if (!smc911x_detect_chip(dev))
> +	if (smc911x_detect_chip(dev))
>   		return 1;
>
>   	smc911x_reset(dev);
>
>    
Applied to net/next.

regards,
Ben