Dear Dave Aldrige,
Am 18.08.2011 15:32, schrieb Dave Aldridge:
> The Cadence GEM is based on the MACB Ethernet controller but has a few
> small changes with regards to register and bitfield placement. This
> patch detects the presence of a GEM by reading the module ID register
> and setting a flag appropriately.
>
> This handles the new HW address, USRIO and hash register base register
> locations in GEM.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Aldridge <fovs...@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/macb.c | 18 +++++++++++-----
> drivers/net/macb.h | 55
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 67 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/macb.c b/drivers/net/macb.c
> index c63eea9..d52dda0 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/macb.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/macb.c
> @@ -88,6 +88,7 @@ struct macb_dma_desc {
>
> struct macb_device {
> void *regs;
> + int is_gem;
is it required to have a runtime distinction here?
I mean is it possible to have a Cadence GEM type and a old style MACB
type of HW on the same device?
If not I would prefer a compile time differentiation here to avoid the
macb_or_gem_(read|write) macros (but lets wait for some comments from
the custodians)
regards
Andreas Bießmann
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
