On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 9:17 AM, Ben Warren biggerbadderben@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Alex,
+extern int macb_eth_initialize(int id, void *regs, unsigned int phy_addr);
+#ifdef CONFIG_CMD_NET +void hammerhead_eth_initialize(bd_t *bi) +{
macb_eth_initialize(0, (void *)MACB0_BASE, bi->bi_phy_id[0]);+} +#endif
Would you mind changing this name to board_eth_initialize(bd_t *bi)? I'm working on a rework of the net library and making this name change now will avoid doing it later. I think you'll be able to figure out where this is going...
Hm. I have a patch to clean up tsec initialization a bit. I'm wondering how this affects the tsec (and my patch). And there are other issues with calling the function something generic like that. The Freescale SOCs have 2 or more (I think we have 5 on one of our chips) TSEC devices. How do you deal with separating out multiple controllers?
Also, won't this break if you have more than one type of controller on a board?
Andy