On Nov 8, 2011, at 5:20 AM, Li Yang-R58472 wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: linuxppc-dev-bounces+leoli=freescale....@lists.ozlabs.org >> [mailto:linuxppc-dev-bounces+leoli=freescale....@lists.ozlabs.org] On >> Behalf Of Scott Wood >> Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 5:12 AM >> To: Zhao Chenhui-B35336 >> Cc: net...@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org; Fleming Andy- >> AFLEMING >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] gianfar: add support for wake-on-packet >> >> On 11/04/2011 07:40 AM, Zhao Chenhui wrote: >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/fsl-tsec-phy.txt >> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/fsl-tsec-phy.txt >>> index 2c6be03..543e36c 100644 >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/fsl-tsec-phy.txt >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/fsl-tsec-phy.txt >>> @@ -56,6 +56,9 @@ Properties: >>> hardware. >>> - fsl,magic-packet : If present, indicates that the hardware supports >>> waking up via magic packet. >>> + - fsl,wake-on-filer : If present, indicates that the hardware >> supports >>> + waking up via arp request to local ip address or unicast packet to >>> + local mac address. >> >> Is there any way to determine this at runtime via the device's registers? >> >> I think TSEC_ID2[TSEC_CFG] can be used. The manual describes it >> awkwardly, but it looks like 0x20 is the bit for the filer. > > That bit only defines the filer feature but not wakeup on it. Another > solution is to get the capability from the fsl_pmc driver, but will make the > driver a lot more complex.
I don't believe there is a way to know this from the controller itself. We have to use device tree for it. - k _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
