Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755834Ab1CKPyR (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Mar 2011 10:54:17 -0500 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.8]:56111 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754671Ab1CKPyQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Mar 2011 10:54:16 -0500 From: Arnd Bergmann To: Mark Brown Subject: Re: RFC: Platform data for onboard USB assets Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 16:54:03 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.2 (Linux/2.6.37; KDE/4.3.2; x86_64; ; ) Cc: andy.green@linaro.org, Linux USB list , lkml References: <4D79F068.2080009@linaro.org> <201103111331.13932.arnd@arndb.de> <20110311152938.GB29920@sirena.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20110311152938.GB29920@sirena.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201103111654.04089.arnd@arndb.de> X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:/zNu6pf7GETAR9MkonbRLKnkUnQ1Q9Xj8jLjhVquuVV +DEY2M5ZnTsJDfOmrWfn9OQPYZypsXEm4NUwqFzqkywDkpNc4b 028XP4uAPVZYnKeusVZnfx2zJhuplBeG23+JYu3McQnWDJMbDt yjuTOcJEyXx8lnJg7gDx059kCcKuKkGBApVyNKD4S1C2UhYAZ+ QQ3zd/Qgoqx3w5P0G5ruQ== Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1518 Lines: 32 On Friday 11 March 2011, Mark Brown wrote: > On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 01:31:13PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > I understand the problem, but IMHO there really needs to be a better > > solution for this. As far as I understand, the underlying problem is > > that USB ethernet devices with a proper MAC address get a different > > device name from devices with a generated random MAC address, and > > the people that designed this board were trying to save a few cents > > by not allocating a MAC address for the ethernet device [1], right? > > > I believe we should fix this particular problem locally, instead of > > coming up with generic infrastructure for broken hardware. > > It's arguable if this stuff is broken at all, from a hardware design > point of view it's perfectly reasonable and if you're shipping volumes > in the millions very small savings add up to interesting numbers easily. It may be reasonable if you don't expect anyone to connect the device to an ethernet port, but in that case you could save much more by removing the ethernet chip and the socket along with the eeprom. Really, any machine without a fixed MAC address is a huge pain for users, just google for "pandaboard mac address" to see how much work this has caused people. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/