[U-Boot] [PATCH] Revert "net: asix: Fix AX88772B when used with DriverModel"
As discussed before rather than Joshua's patch the one from Alban should long since have been applied:
https://www.mail-archive.com/u-boot@lists.denx.de/msg221455.html
This reverts commit 41d1258aceb45b45f9e68f67a9c40f0afbc09dc9.
Signed-off-by: Marcel Ziswiler marcel.ziswiler@toradex.com
---
drivers/usb/eth/asix.c | 5 ----- 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/usb/eth/asix.c b/drivers/usb/eth/asix.c index a610ae4..ad083cf 100644 --- a/drivers/usb/eth/asix.c +++ b/drivers/usb/eth/asix.c @@ -819,11 +819,6 @@ int asix_eth_recv(struct udevice *dev, int flags, uchar **packetp) }
*packetp = ptr + sizeof(packet_len); - - if ((ueth->pusb_dev->descriptor.idVendor == ASIX_USB_VENDOR_ID) && - (ueth->pusb_dev->descriptor.idProduct == AX88772B_USB_PRODUCT_ID)) - *packetp += 2; - return packet_len;
err:
Hi Marcel,
On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Marcel Ziswiler marcel.ziswiler@toradex.com wrote:
As discussed before rather than Joshua's patch the one from Alban should long since have been applied:
https://www.mail-archive.com/u-boot@lists.denx.de/msg221455.html
This reverts commit 41d1258aceb45b45f9e68f67a9c40f0afbc09dc9.
Signed-off-by: Marcel Ziswiler marcel.ziswiler@toradex.com
I had not seen the other patch to know the reason behind the 2 bytes. It was never assigned to me, it was assigned to Marek - He has it marked as superseded in PW: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/655265/
He says that the patch from Alban does not build, but I don't see a follow-up.
Sorry about that.
-Joe
On Fri, 2016-09-09 at 16:16 -0500, Joe Hershberger wrote:
Hi Marcel,
On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Marcel Ziswiler marcel.ziswiler@toradex.com wrote:
As discussed before rather than Joshua's patch the one from Alban should long since have been applied:
https://www.mail-archive.com/u-boot@lists.denx.de/msg221455.html
This reverts commit 41d1258aceb45b45f9e68f67a9c40f0afbc09dc9.
Signed-off-by: Marcel Ziswiler marcel.ziswiler@toradex.com
I had not seen the other patch to know the reason behind the 2 bytes. It was never assigned to me, it was assigned to Marek - He has it marked as superseded in PW: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/655265 /
Sure, I also have not noticed Joshua's which got in way quick.
He says that the patch from Alban does not build, but I don't see a follow-up.
Hm, it builds and runs fine for my two boards the Colibri T20 and Colibri T30 both using one of them AX88772B chips each.
@Marek: May I ask what exactly about Alban's patch does not build for you?
Sorry about that.
No problem. We will figure it out.
Thanks, Joe
On 09/09/2016 11:24 PM, Marcel Ziswiler wrote:
On Fri, 2016-09-09 at 16:16 -0500, Joe Hershberger wrote:
Hi Marcel,
On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Marcel Ziswiler marcel.ziswiler@toradex.com wrote:
As discussed before rather than Joshua's patch the one from Alban should long since have been applied:
https://www.mail-archive.com/u-boot@lists.denx.de/msg221455.html
This reverts commit 41d1258aceb45b45f9e68f67a9c40f0afbc09dc9.
Signed-off-by: Marcel Ziswiler marcel.ziswiler@toradex.com
I had not seen the other patch to know the reason behind the 2 bytes. It was never assigned to me, it was assigned to Marek - He has it marked as superseded in PW: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/655265 /
Sure, I also have not noticed Joshua's which got in way quick.
He says that the patch from Alban does not build, but I don't see a follow-up.
Hm, it builds and runs fine for my two boards the Colibri T20 and Colibri T30 both using one of them AX88772B chips each.
@Marek: May I ask what exactly about Alban's patch does not build for you?
I don't know anymore, sorry. It most likely failed buildman run of the u-boot-usb tree during some PR, so I removed the patch from the PR.
Sorry about that.
No problem. We will figure it out.
Thanks, Joe
participants (3)
-
Joe Hershberger -
Marcel Ziswiler -
Marek Vasut