On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 09:21:43AM -0400, Grant Likely wrote: > On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 13:51:02 +0100, "Edgar E. Iglesias" > <edgar.igles...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 06:28:10PM -0400, Grant Likely wrote: > > > The etraxfs Ethernet model implements quite a nice bitbanging core. The > > > change splits it out into a separate .c file. There are no functional > > > changes here, just movement of code and reformatting to match qemu > > > coding standards. > > > > Hi Grant! > > > > It makes sense to move it out. > > > > A few comments: > > * Maybe we could separate the phy models from the bus model/infrastructure. > > I.e, the qemu_mdio parts into one file and the qemu_phy into another one. > > That way we can add other phy models and keep things separated. > > That makes sense too, but it should be done as a follow on patch. That > keeps the factoring out as a single logical block of code. > > > * Not sure bitbang_ makes sense in the naming, the abstraction supports > > both the bit twiddeling model with MDIO cycles but also a higher level > > transactional version (mdio_write_req etc) that bypass the cycle accuracy. > > The latter is useful for modeling NICs that have MDIO support in hw, e.g > > like the hw/xilinx_axienet.c while beeing able to reuse the PHY models. > > axienet and etraxfs implementations are subtely different (as you know). > I originally was going to do both, but I didn't want to mix > functionality changes in with the factoring out. Doing both at the same > time would have required (slight) behavour changes in one of the models, > so instead I decided to do only one to keep it simple with the other > being a follow-on. > > > I realize I should have done this split when doing the axienet model, > > sorry.. > > Can you help me out with a patch that migrates axienet to the new common > code?
Yes, I can do that part once the new common code is in place. Cheers, Edgar
