Ben,
The data (packet data) and the status/len are different in
LE/BE, cannot use just the macro dm9000_x to cover both. In my case,
packet data is already in BE, but the status/len is in LE; therefore,
status/len require byteswap. This has to do with cpu endian mode.
Regards,
TsiChung
-----Original Message-----
From: Ben Warren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 4:01 PM
To: Liew Tsi Chung
Cc: U-Boot-Users; Rigby John
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix dm9000 receive status and len little endian
issue
Tsi-Chung Liew wrote:
> From: TsiChung Liew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> The received status and len was in little endian format and caused the
> ethernet unable to proceed further. Add __le16_to_cpu() in
> dm9000_rx_status_8/16/32bit().
>
> Signed-off-by: TsiChung Liew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ---
> drivers/net/dm9000x.c | 16 ++++++++++------
> 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/dm9000x.c b/drivers/net/dm9000x.c index
> 844fb76..e7365fe 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/dm9000x.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/dm9000x.c
> @@ -214,24 +214,28 @@ static void dm9000_rx_status_32bit(u16
*RxStatus, u16 *RxLen)
> DM9000_outb(DM9000_MRCMD, DM9000_IO);
>
> tmpdata = DM9000_inl(DM9000_DATA);
> - *RxStatus = tmpdata;
> - *RxLen = tmpdata >> 16;
> + *RxStatus = __le16_to_cpu(tmpdata);
> + *RxLen = __le16_to_cpu(tmpdata >> 16);
> }
>
> static void dm9000_rx_status_16bit(u16 *RxStatus, u16 *RxLen) {
> DM9000_outb(DM9000_MRCMD, DM9000_IO);
>
> - *RxStatus = DM9000_inw(DM9000_DATA);
> - *RxLen = DM9000_inw(DM9000_DATA);
> + *RxStatus = __le16_to_cpu(DM9000_inw(DM9000_DATA));
> + *RxLen = __le16_to_cpu(DM9000_inw(DM9000_DATA));
> }
>
> static void dm9000_rx_status_8bit(u16 *RxStatus, u16 *RxLen) {
> DM9000_outb(DM9000_MRCMD, DM9000_IO);
>
> - *RxStatus = DM9000_inb(DM9000_DATA) + (DM9000_inb(DM9000_DATA)
<< 8);
> - *RxLen = DM9000_inb(DM9000_DATA) + (DM9000_inb(DM9000_DATA) <<
8);
> + *RxStatus =
> + __le16_to_cpu(DM9000_inb(DM9000_DATA) +
> + (DM9000_inb(DM9000_DATA) << 8));
> + *RxLen =
> + __le16_to_cpu(DM9000_inb(DM9000_DATA) +
> + (DM9000_inb(DM9000_DATA) << 8));
> }
>
> /*
>
Sorry for opening Pandora's box, but wouldn't it be better to redefine
the DM9000_x macros instead of where they're called?
regards,
Ben
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
_______________________________________________
U-Boot-Users mailing list
U-Boot-Users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
