On 17:55 Tue 22 Mar     , Jamie Iles wrote:

Hi Jean-Christophe,

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 04:39:17PM +0000, Jamie Iles wrote:

quoted

Hi Jean-Christophe,

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 05:18:11PM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:

quoted

On 11:18 Mon 21 Mar     , Jamie Iles wrote:

quoted

I have an existing tree for this at

	git://github.com/jamieiles/linux-2.6-ji.git macb-gem

based off of 2.6.38 (with your ACK's now added) and I'd be happy with 
either route.

but we must detect the gem via the version register and ditto for macb for
avr32 and at91

so please rebase it over my patch

and you get my sob too

Would you mind respinning your patch without the changes to the clk 
stuff?  Otherwise we're changing it from compile time to version based, 
only to completely remove it in subsequent patches.

Actually, this patch doesn't work anyway as the version register is 
being read before the clks are enabled so the device isn't accessible 
(and the registers haven't yet been ioremap()'d).

yeah I found it also I forget to put he RFC in the patch title as I want just to
give the way to detect it the way to detect it for avr32 and at91
so we can remove the ifdef fully

quoted

Also, can you confirm that the module ID's that you are using to 
differentiate between AT91 and AVR32 won't clash with MACB uses in 
other, non-at91/avr32 chips, or that it doesn't matter?

If this does work, then it would be nice if we made the else path of the 
RMII AT91 tests also test for avr32 too so we aren't driving the USRIO 
pins on platforms that aren't at91 but also aren't avr32.  So something 
the patch below instead.

I'm currently traveling so I can not test it yet will test it next week
but looks good

Best Regards,
J.