Hi Oliver,
On 9 December 2016 at 02:25, Olliver Schinagl oliver@schinagl.nl wrote:
Hey simon
On December 8, 2016 11:21:32 PM CET, Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org wrote:
Hi Oliver,
On 7 December 2016 at 02:26, Olliver Schinagl oliver@schinagl.nl wrote:
On December 7, 2016 4:47:23 AM CET, Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org
wrote:
Hi Oliver,
On 5 December 2016 at 03:28, Olliver Schinagl oliver@schinagl.nl wrote:
Hey Simon,
On 05-12-16 07:24, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Oliver,
On 2 December 2016 at 03:16, Olliver Schinagl oliver@schinagl.nl
wrote:
> > Hey Joe, > > > > On 30-11-16 21:40, Joe Hershberger wrote: >> >> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 9:30 AM, Olliver Schinagl
>> wrote: >>> >>> This patch adds a method for the board to set the MAC address
if
the
>>> environment is not yet set. The environment based MAC addresses
are not
>>> touched, but if the fdt has an alias set, it is parsed and put
into the
>>> environment. >>> >>> E.g. The environment contains ethaddr and eth1addr, and the fdt >>> contains >>> an ethernet1 nothing happens. If the fdt contains ethernet2
however, it
>>> is parsed and inserted into the environment as eth2addr. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Olliver Schinagl oliver@schinagl.nl >>> --- >>> common/fdt_support.c | 8 +++++++- >>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/common/fdt_support.c b/common/fdt_support.c >>> index c34a13c..f127392 100644 >>> --- a/common/fdt_support.c >>> +++ b/common/fdt_support.c >>> @@ -465,6 +465,11 @@ int fdt_fixup_memory(void *blob, u64
start,
u64
>>> size) >>> return fdt_fixup_memory_banks(blob, &start, &size,
1);
>>> } >>> >>> +__weak int board_get_enetaddr(const int i, unsigned char
*mac_addr)
>> >> Ugh. This collides with a function in board/v38b/ethaddr.c and
in
>> board/intercontrol/digsy_mtc/digsy_mtc.c >> >> Also, it's so generic, and only gets called by the fdt fixup
stuff...
>> This function should probably be named in such a way that its >> association with fdt is clear. > > I did not notice that, sorry! But naming suggestions are welcome
:)
> > Right now, I use it in two unrelated spots however. > > from the fdt as seen above and in a subclass driver (which will
come up
> for > review) as suggested by Simon. > > There I do: > > +static int sunxi_gmac_eth_read_rom_hwaddr(struct udevice *dev) > +{ > + struct eth_pdata *pdata = dev_get_platdata(dev); > + > + return board_get_enetaddr(dev->seq, pdata->enetaddr); > +} > + > const struct eth_ops sunxi_gmac_eth_ops = { > .start = designware_eth_start, > .send = designware_eth_send, > @@ -102,6 +110,7 @@ const struct eth_ops sunxi_gmac_eth_ops = { > .free_pkt = designware_eth_free_pkt, > .stop = designware_eth_stop, > .write_hwaddr = designware_eth_write_hwaddr, > + .read_rom_hwaddr = sunxi_gmac_eth_read_rom_hwaddr, > }; > > which is completly unrelated to the fdt. > > So naming suggestion or overal suggestion how to handle this nice
and
> generically? > > Based from the name however I would think that all
board_get_enetaddr's
> work > the same however so should have been interchangeable? Or was that
silly
> thinking?
Would it be possible to use a name without 'board' in it? I think
this
/ hope is actually sunxi-specific code, not board-specific?
You are actually correct, we take the serial number of the SoC
(sunxi
specific) and generate a serial/MAC from it. So nothing to do with
the
board. So I can just name it sunxi_gen_enetaddr(). Would that be
then
(much)
better?
The reason why I went to 'board' with my mind, is because a) the
original
mac gen code and b) the location was in board/sunxi/board.c. I
think
it is
thus also sensible to move it out of board/sunxi/board.c as indeed,
it has
nothing to do with board(s).
That sounds good to me - and you should be able to call it directly from the driver and avoid any weak functions, right?
The subclass driver can, the fdt fixup however still needs a weak
fdt_get_enetaddr()? (Which in our case calls then sunxi_get_enetaddr() i think.)
OK - I feel that the fdt fixups need a bit of thought. At the moment it is all pretty ad-hoc.
Yeah i think i agree, but i guess thats a separate cleanup step generally, no?
OK - are you able to take a look at this?
Regards, Simon