Ben,
On Saturday 30 August 2008, Ben Warren wrote:
+#if !defined(CONFIG_PHY_LESS) +#define CONFIG_PHY_LESS 0xFFFFFFFF /* PHY-less mode */ +#define CONFIG_PHY_LESS_SPEED 1000 +#define CONFIG_PHY_LESS_DUPLEX FULL +#endif
Sorry, but this is not scalable. There are many real-world examples of boards where one controller is connected to a PHY, and another has a FIXED link to a switch or something else. This driver is already an unwieldy mess and adding this sort of thing only makes it worse. If you want to add fixed-link capabilities, please re-direct your efforts towards a more generic, scalable solution.
Yes, this was my first fear too. But take a look at the commet Victor added in his 2nd patch version (I asked specifically for this comment to learn how this should work):
+/* + * Some boards do not have a PHY for each ethernet port. + * For example on Arches board (2 CPU system) eth0 does not have + * a PHY, both CPU's are wired directly together (AC coupled) + * using SGMII0. In these cases set the appropriate + * CONFIG_PHY_ADDR equal to CONFIG_PHY_LESS to detect that + * the specified ethernet port does not have a PHY. + */ +#if !defined(CONFIG_PHY_LESS) +#define CONFIG_PHY_LESS 0xFFFFFFFF /* PHY-less mode */ +#define CONFIG_PHY_LESS_SPEED 1000 +#define CONFIG_PHY_LESS_DUPLEX FULL +#endif
So it's a per ethernet-interface selectable define of the CONFIG_PHY_ADDR and it kind of scales. It's not perfect but at least it's a way to support boards with interfaces connected to PHY's and other without PHY connection.
What do you think? Is this acceptable? Or what other solution would be acceptable?
Thanks.
Best regards, Stefan
===================================================================== DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80 Email: office@denx.de =====================================================================