Peter Tyser wrote:
> Previously, waiting for auto-negotiation would only occur if a valid
> link had been detected. Problems arose when attempting to use a
> tsec immediately after bootup but before link was achieved, eg:
> => dhcp
> Auto-neg error, defaulting to 10BT/HD
> eTSEC1: No link.
> Auto-
On Tue, 2009-08-04 at 17:50 -0500, Peter Tyser wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-07-19 at 15:14 -0500, Peter Tyser wrote:
> > On Wed, 2009-02-04 at 15:14 -0600, Peter Tyser wrote:
> > > Previously, waiting for auto-negotiation would only occur if a valid
> > > link had been detected. Problems arose when attem
On Sun, 2009-07-19 at 15:14 -0500, Peter Tyser wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-02-04 at 15:14 -0600, Peter Tyser wrote:
> > Previously, waiting for auto-negotiation would only occur if a valid
> > link had been detected. Problems arose when attempting to use a
> > tsec immediately after bootup but before li
On Wed, 2009-02-04 at 15:14 -0600, Peter Tyser wrote:
> Previously, waiting for auto-negotiation would only occur if a valid
> link had been detected. Problems arose when attempting to use a
> tsec immediately after bootup but before link was achieved, eg:
> => dhcp
> Auto-neg error, defaulting to
Sorry for the delayed response,
On Tue, 2009-02-10 at 11:31 -0600, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 08:59:11AM -0500, Jerry Van Baren wrote:
> > That is my reasoning behind my statement that we can generally ignore
> > the autonegotiation <-> fixed configuration case because the odds o
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 08:59:11AM -0500, Jerry Van Baren wrote:
> That is my reasoning behind my statement that we can generally ignore
> the autonegotiation <-> fixed configuration case because the odds of it
> working properly are poor anyway.
I'm not fond of giving up any ability to support
Andy Fleming wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Jerry Van Baren
> wrote:
>> Andy Fleming wrote:
>>> On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 7:32 AM, Jerry Van Baren
>>> wrote:
Peter Tyser wrote:
[snip]
>> My experience is that "The second case assumes that the far end link partner
>> fully supports
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Jerry Van Baren wrote:
> Andy Fleming wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 7:32 AM, Jerry Van Baren
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Peter Tyser wrote:
>>
> The problem is that you don't always know which interface you have
> hooked up. So u-boot tries the one set in etha
Andy Fleming wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 7:32 AM, Jerry Van Baren
> wrote:
>> Peter Tyser wrote:
>
The problem is that you don't always know which interface you have
hooked up. So u-boot tries the one set in ethact, and then the next,
etc. With the old method, the penalty fo
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 7:32 AM, Jerry Van Baren wrote:
> Peter Tyser wrote:
>>
>>> The problem is that you don't always know which interface you have
>>> hooked up. So u-boot tries the one set in ethact, and then the next,
>>> etc. With the old method, the penalty for being wrong was quite high
Jerry Van Baren wrote:
> Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>
>> Dear Scott Wood,
>>
>> In message <498a0d5c.5060...@freescale.com> you wrote:
>>
>>> Andy Fleming wrote:
>>>
HmmmI made that change for a reason. Waiting for autonegotiation
to finish on a tsec with no link was quite t
Peter Tyser wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-02-04 at 17:07 -0600, Andy Fleming wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 3:26 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>>> Dear Andy Fleming,
>>>
>>> In message <2acbd3e40902041320l3bce93c1p989c4c33ca8e...@mail.gmail.com> you
>>> wrote:
HmmmI made that change for a reason.
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Scott Wood,
>
> In message <498a0d5c.5060...@freescale.com> you wrote:
>> Andy Fleming wrote:
>>> HmmmI made that change for a reason. Waiting for autonegotiation
>>> to finish on a tsec with no link was quite tiresome. If you've hooked
>>> up the 4th tsec, and tr
On Wed, 2009-02-04 at 17:07 -0600, Andy Fleming wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 3:26 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > Dear Andy Fleming,
> >
> > In message <2acbd3e40902041320l3bce93c1p989c4c33ca8e...@mail.gmail.com> you
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> HmmmI made that change for a reason. Waiting for auton
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 3:26 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Andy Fleming,
>
> In message <2acbd3e40902041320l3bce93c1p989c4c33ca8e...@mail.gmail.com> you
> wrote:
>>
>> HmmmI made that change for a reason. Waiting for autonegotiation
>> to finish on a tsec with no link was quite tiresome. I
Dear Scott Wood,
In message <498a100e.4080...@freescale.com> you wrote:
>
> > Requirement is NOT to initialize network interfaces unless used by
> > U-Boot.
>
> This would be in a case where the user *asks* for all the network
This is impossible. U-Boot will always use only exactly one interfce
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Scott Wood,
>
> In message <498a0d5c.5060...@freescale.com> you wrote:
>> Andy Fleming wrote:
>>> HmmmI made that change for a reason. Waiting for autonegotiation
>>> to finish on a tsec with no link was quite tiresome. If you've hooked
>>> up the 4th tsec, and tr
Dear Scott Wood,
In message <498a0d5c.5060...@freescale.com> you wrote:
> Andy Fleming wrote:
> > HmmmI made that change for a reason. Waiting for autonegotiation
> > to finish on a tsec with no link was quite tiresome. If you've hooked
> > up the 4th tsec, and try to boot, you end up waitin
Andy Fleming wrote:
> HmmmI made that change for a reason. Waiting for autonegotiation
> to finish on a tsec with no link was quite tiresome. If you've hooked
> up the 4th tsec, and try to boot, you end up waiting for *three* tsecs
> to timeout. If dhcp fails because the link isn't up you ca
On Wed, 2009-02-04 at 22:26 +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Andy Fleming,
>
> In message <2acbd3e40902041320l3bce93c1p989c4c33ca8e...@mail.gmail.com> you
> wrote:
> >
> > HmmmI made that change for a reason. Waiting for autonegotiation
> > to finish on a tsec with no link was quite tireso
Dear Andy Fleming,
In message <2acbd3e40902041320l3bce93c1p989c4c33ca8e...@mail.gmail.com> you
wrote:
>
> HmmmI made that change for a reason. Waiting for autonegotiation
> to finish on a tsec with no link was quite tiresome. If you've hooked
> up the 4th tsec, and try to boot, you end up w
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Peter Tyser wrote:
> Previously, waiting for auto-negotiation would only occur if a valid
> link had been detected. Problems arose when attempting to use a
> tsec immediately after bootup but before link was achieved, eg:
> => dhcp
> Auto-neg error, defaulting to 1
Previously, waiting for auto-negotiation would only occur if a valid
link had been detected. Problems arose when attempting to use a
tsec immediately after bootup but before link was achieved, eg:
=> dhcp
Auto-neg error, defaulting to 10BT/HD
eTSEC1: No link.
Auto-neg error, defaulting to 10BT/HD
23 matches
Mail list logo
