[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090311182337.GA5367@pengutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 19:23:37 +0100
From: Robert Schwebel <r.schwebel@...gutronix.de>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: wd@...x.de, shemminger@...tta.com, yanok@...raft.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
dzu@...x.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dnet: Dave DNET ethernet controller driver
On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 06:23:36AM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Wolfgang Denk <wd@...x.de>
> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:09:38 +0100
>
> > How do you then handle situations where this is impossible? Say, when
> > the firmware cannot write to those registers for example because the
> > ethernet controller is not even powered on (to reduce power consump-
> > tion), but will get powered on only in Linux when the driver gets
> > loaded (i. e. on demand only, not always)?
>
> That's what NVRAM, CMOS, EEPROM's and other writable long-term
> storage areas are for.
>
> To be quite honest with you, any ethernet device that doesn't
> have an EEPROM where the chip instance's ethernet address is
> stored is completely broken.
However, it's quite common in embedded systems where eeprom chips cost
money and high quantity projects are cost optimized. So we cannot
neglect reality here. I know almost no ARM board that has a separate
eeprom for the network chip, and especially SoC-integrated MAC units
don't even have hardware interfaces for that.
rsc
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists