Kim Phillips wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 08:53:24 -0400
> richardretanubun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Added for convenience for other platforms that uses MPC8360 (has 8 UCC).
>> 6 eth interface is chosen because the platform I am using combines
>> UCC1&2 and UCC3&4 as gigEth and the other 4 UCC as 10/100 Eth.
>>
>> - Richard
>>
>> From: Richard Retanubun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 17:21:47 -0400
>> Subject: [PATCH] Add two more ethernet interface for 83XX
>> Signed-off-by: Richard Retanubun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Unless you're sending a patch on someone else's behalf, you don't need
> the From:, Date:, and Subject: lines above, esp. since your From email
> does not match your S-o-b email. Please also omit the "- Richard" from
> the git commit part of the patch; if you want say something in addition
> to the commit message, put it below the '---' line..
>
>> ---
>
> ..i.e, here.
>
Understood, thanks for the clarification, will heed for future patches.
>> README | 3 ++
>> common/cmd_bdinfo.c | 17 +++++++++++++++-
>> common/env_common.c | 6 +++++
>> common/env_embedded.c | 6 +++++
>> cpu/mpc83xx/fdt.c | 3 +-
>> drivers/qe/uec.c | 48
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>> include/asm-ppc/u-boot.h | 6 +++++
>> lib_ppc/board.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> net/eth.c | 6 +++++
>> tools/env/fw_env.c | 6 +++++
>> 10 files changed, 128 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> just because 83xx is the first user doesn't mean it has to go
> through the 83xx tree. This patch is really not 83xx specific at all
> and should probably go through net (Ben Warren) if not WD himself.
>
> Having said that, this patch does transcend 4 subsystem areas, so if
> Ben/gvb/WD want to ack/sign off on it, I can handle pushing this
> upstream.
>
Thanks for the help, I realize this touches many subsystems, but I figured I
start at the 83xx community
since (I think) it is the most probable community to find platforms with these
many eth interfaces.
>> diff --git a/README b/README
>> index ccd839c..8802304 100644
>> --- a/README
>> +++ b/README
>> @@ -1095,8 +1095,11 @@ The following options need to be configured:
>>
>> - Ethernet address:
>> CONFIG_ETHADDR
>> + CONFIG_ETH1ADDR
>> CONFIG_ETH2ADDR
>
> hmm..historically ETHADDR has been the implicit ETH1ADDR. Did you mean
> to s/ETHADDR/ETH1ADDR/ ? if so, you'd need a better justification and
> a much larger patch. Otherwise, please don't do this; add a
> CONFIG_ETH6ADDR below instead.
>
I will add CONFIG_ETH6ADDR below.
>> CONFIG_ETH3ADDR
>> + CONFIG_ETH4ADDR
>> + CONFIG_ETH5ADDR
>>
>> Define a default value for Ethernet address to use
>> for the respective Ethernet interface, in case this
>> diff --git a/common/cmd_bdinfo.c b/common/cmd_bdinfo.c
>> index f4d9d40..67cc64f 100644
>> --- a/common/cmd_bdinfo.c
>> +++ b/common/cmd_bdinfo.c
>> @@ -91,11 +91,12 @@ int do_bdinfo ( cmd_tbl_t *cmdtp, int flag, int argc,
>> char *argv[])
>> print_str ("pevfreq", strmhz(buf, bd->bi_pevfreq));
>> #endif
>>
>> +#if defined(CONFIG_HAS_ETH0)
>> puts ("ethaddr =");
>> for (i=0; i<6; ++i) {
>> printf ("%c%02X", i ? ':' : ' ', bd->bi_enetaddr[i]);
>> }
>> -
>> +#endif
>
> how is the above change relevant to the patch subject?
Good catch, I lumped it together because I was in the code neighborhood
got carried away in making the code uniform. I will pull it out of this patch.
Is the idea of adding an #ifdef here valid though?
If it is, I can submit a separate patch for it.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Kim
Thanks for all the feedback
Richard
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
