From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hans de Goede Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 08:46:18 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot] Olimex-A20-EVB ethernet stops working with latest U-boot, works with tag v2016.01 In-Reply-To: <20160313111439.GA29892@excalibur.cnev.de> References: <20160225011057.GA14155@linux-7smt.suse> <56DEAF4B.8020102@redhat.com> <20160309210423.GB1855@excalibur.cnev.de> <20160313111439.GA29892@excalibur.cnev.de> Message-ID: <56E66C4A.2030105@redhat.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, On 13-03-16 12:14, Karsten Merker wrote: > On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 02:39:11PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: >> On 9 March 2016 at 14:04, Karsten Merker wrote: >>> [Olimex A20-SOM-EVB: ethernet non-functional with current u-boot >>> git head, but no problems with v2016.01] > [...] >>> I am not the original poster, but I have bisected the issue down >>> to the following commit: >>> >>> commit c32a6fd07b1839e4a45729587ebc8e1c55601a4d >>> Author: Simon Glass >>> Date: Sun Jan 17 14:51:56 2016 -0700 >>> >>> net: Don't call board/cpu_eth_init() with driver model >>> >>> We should avoid weak functions with driver model. Existing boards that use >>> driver model don't need them, so let's kill them off. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass >>> Reviewed-by: Bin Meng >>> Acked-by: Joe Hershberger >> >> Is this board-specific init, or sunxi-specific? > > Hello Simon, > > I am unsure whether I understand your question correctly. There > is only one cpu_eth_init() function for sunxi-based devices, but > its behaviour depends on several configuration options. Some of > those depend on the SoC type (and are thereby indirectly > board-specific) and some of those (e.g. the GPIO pin controlling > the regulator that powers the PHY) are directly board-specific. > >> Can you just call the init on start-up, instead of from the >> Ethernet driver? > > From a look at the source in arch/arm/cpu/armv7/sunxi/board.c and > board/sunxi/gmac.c I guess that should be possible, but I don't > know enough about u-boot's internals to really assess that. > > Hans, could you take a look at the issue? Yes I've had this thread on my radar / todo the whole time already, not sure when I'll get around to it. I'll make sure to get this fixed soon though, as we'll have a new u-boot release soonish. Regards, Hans