On 11/1/07, Ingo Oeser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Grant,
>
> Grant Likely schrieb:
> > From: Grant Likely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > Driver shouldn't complain if the register range is larger than what
> > it expects. This works around failures with some device trees.
> >
>
> But maybe the firmware guys like to know about it?
> May I suggest putting this in front of the other check?
>
> if ((mem.end - mem.start + 1) > sizeof(struct mpc52xx_fec)) {
> printk(KERN_DEBUG DRIVER_NAME
> " - gratious resource size (%lx > %x), check
> mpc52xx_devices.c\n",
> (unsigned long)(mem.end - mem.start + 1),
> sizeof(struct mpc52xx_fec));
Personally, I'm not concerned about it. Even if the device tree says
the range is larger than what the driver knows about it is not
technically an error. If a new version of the chip appears that is
compatible, but defines a larger register range with extra feature
registers, then this message would be erroneously printed. Finally,
depending on how you read the mpc5200 user guild, it can be 100% valid
to specify the reg size as 0x800 instead of 0x400.
Cheers,
g.
--
Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(403) 399-0195
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
