Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] net/eth: Don't issue warnings for offboard ethernet chips

2011-12-19 Thread Moffett, Kyle D
On Dec 17, 2011, at 15:16, Wolfgang Denk wrote: Dear Kyle Moffett, In message 1324001821-15337-1-git-send-email-kyle.d.moff...@boeing.com you wrote: When using an offboard ethernet chip such as e1000, it is highly likely that the driver has already read a valid MAC address from the onboard

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] net/eth: Don't issue warnings for offboard ethernet chips

2011-12-19 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Moffett, Kyle D, In message 58a08f2d-4743-4634-a909-466eb8535...@boeing.com you wrote: Yes, it should. The rule is that then environment settings always have precedence, and if they are missing or contain different data than other sources for this information, a waning shall be

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] net/eth: Don't issue warnings for offboard ethernet chips

2011-12-17 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Kyle Moffett, In message 1324001821-15337-1-git-send-email-kyle.d.moff...@boeing.com you wrote: When using an offboard ethernet chip such as e1000, it is highly likely that the driver has already read a valid MAC address from the onboard EEPROM. In that case, U-Boot should not issue a

[U-Boot] [PATCH] net/eth: Don't issue warnings for offboard ethernet chips

2011-12-15 Thread Kyle Moffett
When using an offboard ethernet chip such as e1000, it is highly likely that the driver has already read a valid MAC address from the onboard EEPROM. In that case, U-Boot should not issue a warning about the absence of an eth*addr value in the environment. Since the calling code in