Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 28 Feb 2019 20:29:58 +0100
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
To:     Flavio Suligoi <f.suligoi@asem.it>
Cc:     Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        "intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org>,
        "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] net: e1000e: add MAC address kernel cmd line parameter
Message-ID: <20190228192958.GA24085@lunn.ch>
References: <1551361135-404-1-git-send-email-f.suligoi@asem.it>
 <1551361951-1595-1-git-send-email-f.suligoi@asem.it>
 <20190228153245.GA17912@lunn.ch>
 <b12067de92864d5db83bd3da9456e2fe@asem.it>
 <20190228163729.GB17912@lunn.ch>
 <6a7a37813e71420b929c769dd1e77664@asem.it>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <6a7a37813e71420b929c769dd1e77664@asem.it>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 05:13:27PM +0000, Flavio Suligoi wrote:
> > > Hi Andrew,
> > >
> > > we produce a lot of boards and we have to change the MAC address,
> > > from u-boot, for every board.  So I must save in the u-boot
> > > environment (SPI NOR flash) the MAC address for every board.
> > 
> > Hi Flavio
> > 
> > u-boot should be able to write the MAC address in the correct part of
> > device tree. Boards have been doing this a long time.
> > 
> > Module parameters are considered bad. You should only do it if you
> > have no other option. Here you do have another options, so it is going
> > to be a hard sell getting David to access your patch.
> > 
> > You will have more success by adding a call to
> > eth_platform_get_mac_address() to the e1000e driver.
> 
> You have right, and thanks for your suggestions, 
> but with a kernel parameter I can use the same method
> for any board where the NVM is missed, independently of any architecture
> (with or without the device tree presence - ARM or x86 or others).

Hi Flavio

Well, lets wait for David to say what he thinks about the module
parameter.

	Andrew