[U-Boot-Users] Proposed change; What do you think?

Wolfgang Denk wd at denx.de
Mon Aug 23 01:38:34 CEST 2004

In message <1092945083.8297.24.camel at blarg.somerset.sps.mot.com> you wrote:
> However, now I need answers to the following question:  Do you want
> me to retrofit code into all the Config files to #define CONFIG_HAS_ETHx
> where it currently also has CONFIG_ETHxADDR defined, or where the code
> has a board name even though a CONIG_ETHxADDR is not defined too?

Do you want to have your patch accepted?

> Happy to do this, just realize that to be backwards compatible
> with existing config files, I'll have to change many config files.
> I can not test them all.  I can test the 4 I have in front of me.

Please keep all files in a konsistent state.

> FYI, I am also willing to remove the #ifdef conditionality from
> the bd_t structure around these ETH addr fields as well, but with
> the caveat that it changes other people's bd_t structures and
> potentially messes up their Linux interfaces.  Again, I can't
> test all that either...

Don't put to many different things into a  single  patch.  This  last
part  has  a chance of being rejected (depending on what you're going
to do; I'm not sure I understand your intentions).

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

Software Engineering:  Embedded and Realtime Systems,  Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87  Fax: (+49)-8142-4596-88  Email: wd at denx.de
We fight only when there is no other choice. We prefer  the  ways  of
peaceful contact.
	-- Kirk, "Spectre of the Gun", stardate 4385.3

More information about the U-Boot mailing list