[U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] MPC8308ERDB: minimal support for devboard from Freescale

[Ben Warren <biggerbadderben@gmail.com>]

Wolfgang & Ilya,

Sorry for responding to both of you at the same time...

On 6/22/2010 11:14 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Ilya Yanok,
>
> In message<4C1F5A54.4050908@emcraft.com>  you wrote:
>    
>>      
>>> Entry to MAINTAINERS missing.
>>>        
>> Should I add you as a maintainer or myself?
>>      
> You did the actual work...
>
>    
>>>> +int board_eth_init(bd_t *bis)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	cpu_eth_init(bis);	/* Initialize TSECs first */
>>>>
>>>>          
>>> I think it's wrong to ignore the return code here.
>>>        
>> What makes you think so? What can we do with the return code here? Print
>> warning? If we return error from board_eth_init() calling code will call
>> cpu_eth_init() again which is useless as we have already called it.
>>      
>    
Yes, print a warning if < 0.  As you've noticed, returning -1 wouldn't 
be good.  I'm not aware of a U-boot policy for handling hardware 
problems other than printf.
>>>> +	return pci_eth_init(bis);
>>>>          
> My understanding is that pci_eth_init() and board_eth_init() return
> the number of NIC's found - should that number not include the number
> of successfully initialized TSECs?
>
>    
Yes, please.  Something like:

int board_eth_init(bd_t *bis)
{
     int rc, num_if = 0;
     if ((rc = cpu_eth_init(bis)) >= 0)
     {
         num_if += rc;
     } else {
         print error message
     }
     if ((rc = pci_eth_init(bis)) >= 0)
     {
         num_if += rc;
     } else {
         print error message
     }
     return num_if;
}

I'm working on changing net/eth.c to be less kludgy, but am having a 
hard time setting up my test bed.  Hopefully in the next few days.

> Best regards,
>
> Wolfgang Denk
>
>    
regards,
Ben