Hi Andy,
Can you elaborate on why this phy abstraction is needed?
In your original post, you mentioned that you were going to post a
patch to show how your code would be hooked up in an existing net
driver. Did I miss it? It would help in understanding the pros and cons
of using genphy over using
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 23:01 +, James Chapman wrote:
>
>>Hi Andy,
>>
>>Can you elaborate on why this phy abstraction is needed?
>>
>>In your original post, you mentioned that you were going to post a
>>patch to show how your code would be hooked up in an existing
On Thursday 10 March 2005 17:12, Matt Porter wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 08:03:56AM -0800, Eugene Surovegin wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 11:06:53AM +0100, Gerhard Jaeger wrote:
> > > the patch has been posted in October last year (wow, thought it was in
> > > december or so):
> > > http:
On Thursday 10 March 2005 17:03, Matt Porter wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 08:37:08AM +0100, Gerhard Jaeger wrote:
> > On Wednesday 09 March 2005 18:11, Sanjay Bajaj wrote:
> > > Has anybody used PPC 440GX with NS DP83865 phy? If you have or have any
> > > information to set it up, please share.
On Thursday 10 March 2005 17:03, Eugene Surovegin wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 11:06:53AM +0100, Gerhard Jaeger wrote:
> > the patch has been posted in October last year (wow, thought it was in
> > december or so):
> > http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-embedded/2004-October/015811.html
> >
On Thursday 10 March 2005 09:34, Eugene Surovegin wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 08:37:08AM +0100, Gerhard Jaeger wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > I have sent a patch (which has been rejected) a few
> > weeks ago to the list which changes the setup procedure of the EMAC to work
> > with a DP83865 PHY. T
Ok, accepted, I'll be delayed until driver will be done.
Andrey
Kumar Gala wrote:
> I would assume you plan on moving your driver over to the driver model
> which will make all of this moot.
>
> So I think Sylvain's suggestion of allocating a number for the time
> being makes the most sense un
Sylvain Munaut wrote:
>
>> Sylvain, but what I wish now - only single number
>> (until driver will done).
>
> If you only need a temporary ocp ID, just fix it youself in your local
> tree, no need to try to push that upstream.
I already use it as temp, but I don't want pitfalls in future (when
Sorry again for the spam.
Mark
-embedded/attachments/20050310/c583b221/attachment.txt
-embedded/attachments/20050310/6104c71e/attachment.txt
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 08:03:56AM -0800, Eugene Surovegin wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 11:06:53AM +0100, Gerhard Jaeger wrote:
> > the patch has been posted in October last year (wow, thought it was in
> > december or so):
> > http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-embedded/2004-October/015811.h
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 08:37:08AM +0100, Gerhard Jaeger wrote:
> On Wednesday 09 March 2005 18:11, Sanjay Bajaj wrote:
> > Has anybody used PPC 440GX with NS DP83865 phy? If you have or have any
> > information to set it up, please share.
> >
> We're using this PHY on a custom 440GX board. Conne
On Wednesday 09 March 2005 18:11, Sanjay Bajaj wrote:
> Has anybody used PPC 440GX with NS DP83865 phy? If you have or have any
> information to set it up, please share.
>
We're using this PHY on a custom 440GX board. Connected via GMII!
After setting up the RGMII bridge correctly (see manual), y
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 11:06:53AM +0100, Gerhard Jaeger wrote:
> the patch has been posted in October last year (wow, thought it was in
> december or so):
> http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-embedded/2004-October/015811.html
>
> I think it needs some cleanup to apply correctly, but the issue i
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 21:31:05 -0600 (CST)
From: Kumar Gala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: akpm at osdl.org
Cc: linuxppc-embedded at ozlab.org, trini at kernel.crashing.org
Subject: [PATCH] ppc32: Consolidate Kconfig support for 83xx
Andrew,
(Note this removes a
Jeff,
Just wondering if this got lost? Might be moot depending what
likelihood of getting Andy's PHY Abstraction Layer changes into the
kernel.
- kumar
On Mar 4, 2005, at 1:55 AM, Kumar Gala wrote:
> Jeff,
>
> This patch updates the name identifier to list both of the Marvell PHYs
> that are
I would assume you plan on moving your driver over to the driver model
which will make all of this moot.
So I think Sylvain's suggestion of allocating a number for the time
being makes the most sense until we get 52xx convert over to platform
devices.
- kumar
On Mar 10, 2005, at 12:57 AM, And
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 08:37:08AM +0100, Gerhard Jaeger wrote:
[snip]
> I have sent a patch (which has been rejected) a few
> weeks ago to the list which changes the setup procedure of the EMAC to work
> with a DP83865 PHY. THe current implementation will not work.
Gerhard, I wasn't able to fin
19 matches
Mail list logo
