On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 09:23:56AM +0200, Franck JULLIEN wrote:
> 2011/4/11 Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <
plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>
>
> > On 20:21 Sun 10 Apr , Franck JULLIEN wrote:
> > > 2011/4/10 Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <
plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>
> > >
> > > > > index 0000000..2687377
> > > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > > +
> > > > > +static int tse_get_ethaddr(struct eth_device *edev,
> > unsigned
> > > char *m)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > + /* There is no eeprom */
> > > > so return the content of the register no?
> > > >
> > > > Well, the register is reseted to 0 when the MAC starts so there
> > is
> > > no
> > > > Ethernet address
> > > > to get.
> > > >
> > > except this function is supposed to return the mac address of the
> > device
> > > at
> > > any time so after a set of it it will not be true any more
> > >
> > > If I implement the function I get a "eth@eth0: got MAC address from
> > > EEPROM: 00:00:00:00:00:00" at startup.
> > > That why I returned -1 as what I could find int at91_ether.c......
> > > Or, I could find something to return -1 as long as the MAC address
> > hasn't
> > > been set.
> > >
> > I known this issue I re-write recently the at91_ether and the same on macb
> > will post the patch soon
> >
> > It's fine the uperlayer will see that it's not a valid mac so this will
> > generate a random one
> > cf net/net.c IIRC
> >
> >
> For me, it's a bit annoying to get this message at startup.
>
> Don't you really think I could have a flag in the private structure to check
> if an address has been set and then return -1 or the address in the
> tse_get_ethaddr function ?