Hi Richard & Wolfgang, richardretanubun wrote: > Wolfgang Denk wrote: > >> Dear richardretanubun, >> >> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: >>> Please disregard V2. V1 is correct, except for this change: >> So you will submit a V3? > I am not so sure about it. > > This patch came to be when I wanted to make it convenient for using > u-boot to test a platform with six eth interface without the need of > an fdt. > > However, I seem to have sparked a discussion of a larger scope than I > expected. :) > > Everyone's comment seems to indicate that streamlining is needed for > the network code. > > I'd hate to muck the existing code some more with more copy-paste > just for convenience's sake.
I was the most vocal "everybody", but my counterproposal thoughts were poorly developed. Until I or someone else has (takes) the time to develop a viable alternative, I don't have any problem with your current solution. When the next sucker tries to extend from six to eight ethernets, maybe we will develop a scalable alternative that is viable. :-/ [snip] > Cheers, > - Richard Thanks, gvb _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot