[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf >> Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: 09 January 2008 20:26 >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Cc: u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net >> Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] TSEC Ethernet driver patch - RFC >> >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Ben Warren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Sent: 08 January 2008 16:42 >>> To: Firth,MJC,Michael,DMM R >>> Cc: u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net >>> Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] Possible TSEC Ethernet driver patch >>> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> >>>> While debugging a board recently I found that the MDIO >>>> >>> (mii) command >>> >>>> support in the TSEC Ethernet driver is somewhat unhelpful. >>>> >>>> Currently, even though there is a comment in the code that >>>> >>> "For now, >>> >>>> only TSEC1 (index 0) has access to the PHYs, so all of >>>> >> the entries >> >>>> have '0'", all MDIO commands are processed by searching >>>> >> for a TSEC >> >>>> instance that has the requested MDIO address associated >>>> >>> with it, and >>> >>>> then using that instance to run the command, even though, >>>> >>> because of >>> >>>> the aforementioned comment, all instances process MDIO commands >>>> through the same port. >>>> >>>> This means that it is only possible to communicate with >>>> >>> MDIO addresses >>> >>>> that have a TSEC instance associated with them, even though the >>>> hardware is capable of accessing any address. It also means >>>> >>> that there >>> >>>> is a list search that isn't needed. >>>> >>>> I have patched the 1.3.1 U-Boot code to remove this >>>> >> search, and to >> >>>> interrogate the requested PHY directly. This means that it >>>> >>> is possible >>> >>>> to directly access all 32 PHY addresses. >>>> >>>> Is this a change that would be more generally useful to >>>> >> the U-Boot >> >>>> community, and, if so, how should I submit a more general >>>> >> patch for >> >>>> this? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> Why don't you post what you have, clearly label it as 'RFC' >>> and we'll have a look. In my spare time (very spare indeed) >>> >> I'm trying >> >>> to decouple PHYs from MACs, but time is hard to find and meanwhile >>> things need to work. >>> >>> regards, >>> Ben >>> >>> >> Patch below. >> >> The main area I wasn't sure on how to handle was how to >> replace the other calls to 'read_phy_reg' and 'write_phy_reg' >> in the code. Currently I've used a #define to map these on to >> the modified functions that take the phy address as a parameter. >> >> --- u-boot-1.3.1-orig/drivers/net/tsec.c 2007-12-06 >> 09:21:19.000000000 +0000 >> +++ u-boot-1.3.1/drivers/net/tsec.c 2008-01-09 20:19:36.000000000 >> +0000 >> @@ -241,10 +244,9 @@ >> * It will wait for the write to be done (or for a timeout to >> * expire) before exiting >> */ >> -void write_phy_reg(struct tsec_private *priv, uint regnum, >> uint value) >> +void write_any_phy_reg(struct tsec_private *priv, uint phyid, uint >> regnum, uint value) >> { >> volatile tsec_t *regbase = priv->phyregs; >> - uint phyid = priv->phyaddr; >> int timeout = 1000000; >> >> regbase->miimadd = (phyid << 8) | regnum; @@ -255,17 +257,19 @@ >> while ((regbase->miimind & MIIMIND_BUSY) && timeout--) ; } >> >> +/* #define to provide old write_phy_reg functionality without >> duplicating code */ >> +#define write_phy_reg(priv, regnum, value) >> write_any_phy_reg(priv,priv->phyaddr,regnum,value) >> + >> /* Reads register regnum on the device's PHY through the >> * registers specified in priv. It lowers and raises the read >> * command, and waits for the data to become valid (miimind >> * notvalid bit cleared), and the bus to cease activity (miimind >> * busy bit cleared), and then returns the value >> */ >> -uint read_phy_reg(struct tsec_private *priv, uint regnum) >> +uint read_any_phy_reg(struct tsec_private *priv, uint phyid, uint >> regnum) >> { >> uint value; >> volatile tsec_t *regbase = priv->phyregs; >> - uint phyid = priv->phyaddr; >> >> /* Put the address of the phy, and the register >> * number into MIIMADD */ >> @@ -288,6 +292,9 @@ >> return value; >> } >> >> +/* #define to provide old read_phy_reg functionality without >> duplicating code */ >> +#define read_phy_reg(priv,regnum) >> read_any_phy_reg(priv,priv->phyaddr,regnum) >> + >> /* Discover which PHY is attached to the device, and configure it >> * properly. If the PHY is not recognized, then return 0 >> * (failure). Otherwise, return 1 >> @@ -1487,18 +1494,6 @@ >> #if defined(CONFIG_MII) || defined(CONFIG_CMD_MII) \ >> && !defined(BITBANGMII) >> >> -struct tsec_private *get_priv_for_phy(unsigned char phyaddr) -{ >> - int i; >> - >> - for (i = 0; i < MAXCONTROLLERS; i++) { >> - if (privlist[i]->phyaddr == phyaddr) >> - return privlist[i]; >> - } >> - >> - return NULL; >> -} >> - >> /* >> * Read a MII PHY register. >> * >> @@ -1509,14 +1504,14 @@ >> unsigned char reg, unsigned short *value) { >> unsigned short ret; >> - struct tsec_private *priv = get_priv_for_phy(addr); >> + struct tsec_private *priv = privlist[0]; >> >> if (NULL == priv) { >> printf("Can't read PHY at address %d\n", addr); >> return -1; >> } >> >> - ret = (unsigned short)read_phy_reg(priv, reg); >> + ret = (unsigned short)read_any_phy_reg(priv, addr, reg); >> *value = ret; >> >> return 0; >> @@ -1531,14 +1526,14 @@ >> static int tsec_miiphy_write(char *devname, unsigned char addr, >> unsigned char reg, unsigned short value) { >> - struct tsec_private *priv = get_priv_for_phy(addr); >> + struct tsec_private *priv = privlist[0]; >> >> if (NULL == priv) { >> printf("Can't write PHY at address %d\n", addr); >> return -1; >> } >> >> - write_phy_reg(priv, reg, value); >> + write_any_phy_reg(priv, addr, reg, value); >> >> return 0; >> } >> >> Signed-off-by: Michael Firth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> > Does the lack of comments on this mean that people are happy with it, > or that they haven't had a chance to consider it yet? > > More the latter than the former, I'm afraid. I'll hopefully have a look today.
regards, Ben ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ U-Boot-Users mailing list U-Boot-Users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
