Subject: Re: [PATCH] cs89x0: add support for i.MX31ADS ARM board

From: Gilles Chanteperdrix <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2008 16:13:45 +0200

Lennert Buytenhek wrote:
> I don't have the original patch in my netdev box anymore, but what
> seems to me should be done is to add a platform driver interface to
> the cs89x0 driver, like how most other non-PCI non-other-autoconf-
> supporting-bus net drivers do it.  (There aren't too many -- grep
> for platform_driver_register in drivers/net/*)
> 
> Then the knowledge about I/O addresses and IRQ lines can live in the
> platform code (where it belongs) instead of having it all in the driver
> (where it doesn't belong).  And all the IXDP2351 and IXDP2X01 ifdefs
> can disappear as well.  And the ->readword()/->writeword() hacks that
> need to be done for IXDP2351 and IXDP2X01 and PNX can then just be an
> (optional) set of platform data methods, with a fallback to the default
> one if they aren't passed in.
> 
> The question is whether someone wants to step up and do that work.
> cs89x0 has seen a lot of drive-by patching by people looking to satisfy
> their needs, but noone has stepped up to give it the proper love and
> care that it deserves.
> 
> Gilles, are you willing to do the platform driver conversion?  If not,
> then I guess we should just merge this patch as-is (after you explain
> why you need to stub out reset_chip() on your board, as no other board
> seems to need this?).

Hi Lennert,

When I published this patch, I had access to an i.MX31ADS board, and
getting Linux to work on this board was just a necessity to get my job
done. I did this by copying the parts I needed working (the serial
console and ethernet driver) from the Freescale tree.

Now, I am no longer working on this, so I can not test any modification.
And I do not even know why people at Freescale did what they did.

All I can tell you is that an i.MX31ADS board works when using this patch.

Regards.

-- 
					    Gilles.