[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201203062134.38077.arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 21:34:37 +0000
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Roland Stigge <stigge@...com.de>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com,
alexander.h.duyck@...el.com, eilong@...adcom.com,
ian.campbell@...rix.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
w.sang@...gutronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kevin.wells@....com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
baruch@...s.co.il, joe@...ches.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] lpc32xx: Added ethernet driver
Hi Roland,
One more thing I noticed this time:
On Tuesday 06 March 2012, Roland Stigge wrote:
> +static inline phy_interface_t lpc_phy_interface_mode(void)
> +{
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_LPC32XX_MII_SUPPORT
> + return PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_MII;
> +#else
> + return PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_RMII;
> +#endif
> +}
> +
> +static inline int use_iram_for_net(void)
> +{
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_LPC32XX_IRAM_FOR_NET
> + return 1;
> +#else
> + return 0;
> +#endif
> +}
This should eventually both become run-time options based on the device tree.
I don't know if you planned to do that anyway, but if you want the same kernel
binary to be used for systems in different configurations, you cannot have
compile-time decisions that are exclusive-or. Since you don't support device
tree yet but plan to do that in the future, you could add a comment here
about it, or you could even prepare it for that case already by passing the
device into the functions that will be required for reading the properties.
Arnd
--
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