On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 16:25:20 -0400 richardretanubun richardretanubun@ruggedcom.com wrote:
Kim Phillips wrote:
On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 08:53:24 -0400 richardretanubun richardretanubun@ruggedcom.com wrote:
..i.e, here.
Understood, thanks for the clarification, will heed for future patches.
excellent, thanks.
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.
fyi, 85xx does too (and they even have more interface connections on their boards).
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_ETH1ADDRhmm..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.
wait, no, CONFIG_ETH1ADDR is indeed valid and being used. It's good you're adding this to the documentation to not confuse people like myself - ack! and no need to add ETH6ADDR below either.
+++ 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.
not sure; I seem to remember some code depending on its existence even if the board didn't configure any interfaces, but, sure, send a patch and I'm sure it'll get tested. I'm assuming none of this is for 2008.10 release, btw.
Kim