[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201103180925.30074.arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 09:25:29 +0100
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: andy.green@...aro.org
Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
Linux USB list <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: Platform data for onboard USB assets
On Friday 18 March 2011, Andy Green wrote:
> On 03/17/2011 11:27 PM, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
>
> > The patch below also looks right to me. I believe it also has the
> > advantage of u-boot already knowing how to update the
> > local-mac-address property at boot time.
>
> In my (tested, working, complete) patch series, I allow platform_data
> based override of MAC at usbnet level, so all the drivers can benefit
> from it.
>
> Is this not a case of "small thinking" from a Device Tree perspective
> that Arnd's patch only targets smsc95xx? Or did I miss some
> disadvantage to allowing this functional configuration option at usbnet
> layer?
I think either way works (usb-net or individual drivers), the difference is
which information you use when both a hardware MAC address and the
local-mac-address property are used. Your patch uses the local-mac-address,
mine would use the hardware mac address and only fall back to the
property if there is no other one.
I still need to look at your patch series, I didn't realize you had
already sent it.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists