[En-Nut-Discussion] Extra packet in ethernet packet

[Paweł]

>>>>>> "Coleman" == Coleman Brumley <cbrumley at polarsoft.biz> writes:
>     Coleman> Uwe, I've not looked to see if this was removed in the latest
>     Coleman> code base.
>
>     Coleman> I do not have SVN rights that I know of.
>
>     >> arch/arm/dev/atmel/at91sam7x_emac.c is marked obsolete and not
>     >> referenced in our build system. Any reason not to remove this file?
>
>     Coleman> Why is marked as obsolete? Has the driver been merged with a
>     Coleman> unified driver or something?
>
> SVN has
> nut/arch/arm/dev/atmel/at91_emac.c
> nut/arch/arm/dev/atmel/at91sam7x_emac.c
>
> and the configuration only references "arm/dev/atmel/ih_at91emac.c" with a
> comment:
> nut/conf/arch/arm.nut:-- Ethernet driver source. at91sam7x_emac.c will become obsolete.
>
> Can somebody of the arm people comment?
In my opinion arch/arm/dev/atmel/at91sam7x_emac.c is not used and it is
not needed.
On at91sam7x platform I'm using nut/arch/arm/dev/atmel/at91_emac.c and
it working well.

>>>    Does anyone resolved this problem?
>>> Removing "sz++" is not enough to send packet with odd bytes number.

    Of course this is not true - my fault.
After changes everything looks ok.

regards
Pawel