Ben Warren wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> Subject: [PATCH 08/11 v1] ARM: OMAP3: Add I2C and network support >> >> From: Dirk Behme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> Add I2C and network support >> >> > > I2C and network bits are kinda unrelated, don't you think? > <snip>
Ben: Yes, you are right ;) The OMAP3 patch is ~300k and I tried to put this in as less patches as possible while having no patch > 40k. This resulted in some more or less unrelated code in one patch. Alternative would be to have more than the ~11 patches at the list we already have. >> Index: u-boot_master/net/eth.c >> =================================================================== >> --- u-boot_master.orig/net/eth.c >> +++ u-boot_master/net/eth.c >> @@ -508,7 +508,7 @@ extern int emac4xx_miiphy_initialize(bd_ >> extern int mcf52x2_miiphy_initialize(bd_t *bis); >> extern int ns7520_miiphy_initialize(bd_t *bis); >> extern int davinci_eth_miiphy_initialize(bd_t *bis); >> - >> +extern int eth_init(bd_t *bd); >> >> int eth_initialize(bd_t *bis) >> { >> @@ -532,6 +532,9 @@ int eth_initialize(bd_t *bis) >> #if defined(CONFIG_DRIVER_TI_EMAC) >> davinci_eth_miiphy_initialize(bis); >> #endif >> +#if defined(CONFIG_DRIVER_SMC911X) >> + eth_init(bis); >> > > This isn't the right place to call eth_init(). I know the namespaces are > pretty convoluted, but the eth_initialize() family of functions are > intended to do things like register devices, initialize data structures > etc. without actually enabling the device. eth_init() enables a device. > The SMC911X driver doesn' t have such a thing, which is why none of the > other boards that use this chip have anything in this file. Mani, Steve: Any comments on this? Ben: Any hint where in existing code it is done right to take this as example? Thanks Dirk _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot