Bob Brusa wrote: > This repeats a patch handed in already on 14-Jan-2010. But the > epk-file then used does not correspond to the desired format. So I > switched over to a textfile, obtained from a diff (see further > down).
Hi Robert, Thanks for your contribution to eCos! Robert, but, I see that Lambrecht Jürgen noticed us and you that he plans to incorporate own changes for the at91 ethernet driver to eCos soon: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-patches/2010-01/msg00003.html > I found a bug in the v3_0 eth-driver if_at91.c. It is in the > handling of the buffer-to-list copy in routine at91_eth_recv. > Actually, it only treats the first list and leaves all "higher" ones > empty, thereby loosing data in packages that exceed the length of a > single list. Jürgen pointed on the several problems in the code. And it's possible (I hope) that described the issue will be fixed in his patch. I just afraid any duplicating efforts on the same code. The last record in the driver's ChangeLog was done in 2007, so, any today's fixes or improvements for the driver will be applicable for both v3_0 and cvs driver code. Now, two words about more important thing for any contribution to eCos. As I could see your patch is not trivial {1,10} lines patch. So, you need to send own copy of a copyright assignment to eCos maintainers. May be you've got the assignment (I'm sorry, I'm not seeing you in the list), then let us to know, please. References: http://ecos.sourceware.org/contrib.html http://ecos.sourceware.org/assign.html > The attached text file my.patch was generated using the command > > cvs -q diff -u5 -w -p devs\eth\arm\at91 >> my.patch > > Unfortunately as a newbie, I had added a lot of comments and all > these lines with new comments (which I think are useful) are now > listed as changes. >From here http://ecos.sourceware.org/docs-latest/ref/hal-porting-coding-conventions.html you can know a bit on eCos coding style in common cases. Certainly, a looking of eCos code itself will give you another clues for that how eCos code must look. In common cases that's BSD indent style. Line terminators must be NL ('\n') only. The originals have not CRs; So, if your editor messes up the code, either tune the editor, please, or use any kind of `dos2unix' program to remove the noise from the sources. Thanks, Sergei
