On 16/03/15 09:51, Hans de Goede wrote: > 2) Are the eeproms prepolulated on ALL olinuxino-s ? If they are not > populated from the factory, I see little added value and I think I may > end up nacking any patches for this, but first lets hear your arguments :)
The eeproms are physically present on all boards as far as I can tell, however on every olinuxino I have, they are blank from the factory (i.e. content of every byte is 0xFF). If Olimex have defined a format for the contents of the eeprom, I've not been able to find it. So while I have no objection to using the eeprom for something like this, can we at least try to come up with something that: 1) Is optional. 2) Is disabled by default. 3) Allows for configurable format 4) Allows for configurable i2c bus and address (i.e. so you can add an eeprom to a cb2) That way we don't stomp all over existing users while allowing people who want the feature to easily enable it. It would obviously also be good if when the feature is disabled, or we detect that the eeprom contains invalid data, then we fall back to using the current SID based method for generating the MAC. There's one obvious question for me with any scheme like this. Olliver might want a 10 character serial number, I might want 12, someone else wants 15. How do we handle that? Would have been easier if Olimex put a unique serial number in the eeprom, but as it's already too late for that we shouldn't put ourselves in a corner that results in everyone using the same set of serial numbers. Is there any chance of using something in DT to define the format? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "linux-sunxi" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
