In message 1092945083.8297.24.camel@blarg.somerset.sps.mot.com you wrote:
However, now I need answers to the following question: Do you want me to retrofit code into all the Config files to #define CONFIG_HAS_ETHx where it currently also has CONFIG_ETHxADDR defined, or where the code has a board name even though a CONIG_ETHxADDR is not defined too?
Do you want to have your patch accepted?
Happy to do this, just realize that to be backwards compatible with existing config files, I'll have to change many config files. I can not test them all. I can test the 4 I have in front of me.
Please keep all files in a konsistent state.
FYI, I am also willing to remove the #ifdef conditionality from the bd_t structure around these ETH addr fields as well, but with the caveat that it changes other people's bd_t structures and potentially messes up their Linux interfaces. Again, I can't test all that either...
Don't put to many different things into a single patch. This last part has a chance of being rejected (depending on what you're going to do; I'm not sure I understand your intentions).
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk