[PATCH] smc91x: remove ARM hack for unaligned 16-bit writes

Russell King - ARM Linux [off-list ref] writes:

On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 08:02:35PM +0200, Robert Jarzmik wrote:

quoted

Arnd Bergmann [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

On Thursday, August 25, 2016 4:43:04 PM CEST Arnd Bergmann wrote:

quoted

 drivers/net/ethernet/smsc/smc91x.h | 50 +++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)

While this patch fixes one bug on Neponset, it probably doesn't address
the one that Russell ran into first, so this is for review only for now,
until the remaining problem(s) have been worked out.

The comment should have been on another patch, my mistake. please
see v2.

	Arnd

Hi Arnd,

I didn't review the patch thoroughly, but I launched your 2 patches in my pxa
little farm.

The result is that lubbock and mainstone are all right, but zylonite is broken
(ie. networkless). I removed then these 2 patches and zylonite worked again.

I have also an error message on the console on a "broken" zylonite :
  Changing smcs91x MAC address to 08:00:3e:26:0a:5b: ifconfig: SIOCSIFHWADDR:
  Device or resource busy

I reran the test twice (2 times with your patches, 2 times without), the result
looks consistent, ie. zylonite doesn't really like them.

Please try the patch below.  I sent this to Will a few days ago, as
he said (on irc) that he was also seeing problems on a platform he
had, but I've yet to hear back.  I've not posted it yet because I
haven't got around to writing a commit description for it.

It does require that at least one of 8-bit or 16-bit accesses are
supported, but I think that's already true.

Hi Russell,

With your patch :
 - lubbock, mainstone and zylonite boards are working correctly
   => ie. all my boards are working correctly

 - the message "ifconfig: SIOCSIFHWADDR: Device or resource busy" is still there
   => this message is here even without your patch, so it's rather not relevant
   => this message is triggered by an "/sbin/ifconfig eth0 hw ether
   08:00:3e:26:0a:5b" command

So from a PXA testing point of view it's all good, ie.
Tested-by: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr>

Cheers.

-- 
Robert