EV-64260-BP & GT64260 bi_recs
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
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
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