Anatolij Gustschin wrote:

+struct reg_tbl {
+	void __iomem *fec_ievent;
+	void __iomem *fec_imask;
+	void __iomem *fec_r_des_active;
+	void __iomem *fec_x_des_active;
+	void __iomem *fec_r_des_start;
+	void __iomem *fec_x_des_start;
+	void __iomem *fec_r_cntrl;
+	void __iomem *fec_ecntrl;
+	void __iomem *fec_ivec;
+	void __iomem *fec_mii_speed;
+	void __iomem *fec_addr_low;
+	void __iomem *fec_addr_high;
+	void __iomem *fec_hash_table_high;
+	void __iomem *fec_hash_table_low;
+	void __iomem *fec_r_buff_size;
+	void __iomem *fec_r_bound;
+	void __iomem *fec_r_fstart;
+	void __iomem *fec_x_fstart;
+	void __iomem *fec_fun_code;
+	void __iomem *fec_r_hash;
+	void __iomem *fec_x_cntrl;
+	void __iomem *fec_dma_control;
+};

Why void and not the specific type?

 static void set_promiscuous_mode(struct net_device *dev)
 {
 	struct fs_enet_private *fep = netdev_priv(dev);
-	fec_t __iomem *fecp = fep->fec.fecp;
+	struct reg_tbl *fecp = fep->fec.rtbl;

Hmm, having something called "fecp" that is a different type than other 
"fecp"s could be confusing.

You can put a data pointer in the of_platform match struct, instead of 
re-checking the compatible.

-Scott