On Thu, 13 January 2005 17:00:16 -0800, Eugene Surovegin wrote: > On Thu, Jan 13, 2005 at 10:58:08PM +0100, J?rn Engel wrote: > > > > http://www.broadcom.com/collateral/pb/5325-PB05-R.pdf > > > > With some thinking and very little code, you can use this neat chip > > almost like a normal phy. > > Yeah, but why would I want to? If you connect your MAC to any 5 PHYs > my statement still stands, if directly to MII you don't need any PHY > stuff at all, because link is always ON and speed/duplex is fixed. > > In fact, we use different switch chips connected to PPC4xx directly. > In this situation, in my NAPI IBM EMAC driver I just have special > "PHY-less" case which is trivial "fixed settings" one. And all this > PHY lib is completely unneeded bloat.
Wrt. the proposed PHY lib, I agree. Didn't even bother to look at the code, it's mere size said enough. But an abstraction different from drivers/net/mii.c is needed to handle the 5325 chip. Or, you could have the special cases all over in your code, but that's a) ugly and b) more code. I used to have such a mess and after doing the proper abstraction, it line count went down. J?rn -- Time? What's that? Time is only worth what you do with it. -- Theo de Raadt
