Re: EV-64260-BP & GT64260 bi_recs
From: Wolfgang Denk <hidden>
Date: 2002-03-20 07:55:36
In message [ref] you wrote:
The BI_ETH_CFG has already been shot down so we don't need to worry about it anyway.
Has been shot down? When? Where? Why? Am I missing something? So how are we going to solve this issue - in 2.4 and 2.5? We need to deal with boards with more than one ethernet interface, which are already active in the firmware (net-booting from redundand interfaces, using separate MAC addresses).
quoted
Ethernet driver, or where? How do you make sure that each Ethernet interface gets the MAC address that belongs to it?
We added an index field to BI_ETH_CFG, didn't we? The driver would then "know" how to map this...
This is a good point and this is an issue with any generic ethernet bi_rec scheme. At this point, I'm back to preferring what you've done since...well...its done and I don't see anyone else caring much about this for other drivers.
We _do_ care, a little for 8xx, very much for 8260, also for 824x and 4xx. Wolfgang Denk -- Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems, Embedded Linux Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87 Fax: (+49)-8142-4596-88 Email: wd@denx.de Fools ignore complexity. Pragmatists suffer it. Some can avoid it. Geniuses remove it. - Perlis's Programming Proverb #58, SIGPLAN Notices, Sept. 1982 ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/