EV-64260-BP & GT64260 bi_recs 
    Wolfgang Denk 
    wd at denx.de
       
    Wed Mar 20 18:55:36 EST 2002
    
    
  
In message <3C97C301.B5A95C8B at mvista.com> 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).
> > 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 at 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/
    
    
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list