From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: buytenh@wantstofly.org (Lennert Buytenhek)
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 11:58:02 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [ARM] Kirkwood: enhance TLCK detection
In-Reply-To: <FCBE654890C0334289D0AD3AF4EF009FD18F0B3FA2@IL-MB01.marvell.com>
References: <20101020085720.GA12979@mail.wantstofly.org>
	<1287647127-1434-1-git-send-email-simon@sequanux.org>
	<20101021075318.GB22363@mail.wantstofly.org>
	<FCBE654890C0334289D0AD3AF4EF009FD18F0B3FA2@IL-MB01.marvell.com>
Message-ID: <20101021095802.GE22363@mail.wantstofly.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 10:11:24AM +0200, Saeed Bishara wrote:

> >> -	if ((dev == MV88F6281_DEV_ID && (rev == MV88F6281_REV_A0 ||
> >> -					rev == MV88F6281_REV_A1)) ||
> >> -	    (dev == MV88F6282_DEV_ID))
> >> -		return 200000000;
> >> +	if (dev == MV88F6281_DEV_ID || dev == MV88F6282_DEV_ID)
> >> +		if ((readl(SAMPLE_AT_RESET) >> 21 & 1) == 0)
> >> +			return 200000000;
> >>  
> >>  	return 166666667;
> >>  }
> >
> >Can we not just make this:
> >
> >	if ((readl(SAMPLE_AT_RESET) >> 21 & 1) == 0)
> >		return 200000000;
> >	else
> >		return 166666667;
> >
> >(I don't have the necessary docs, Saeed might have to answer this one.)
>
> Lennert, the docs and our reference code shows that the original code of Simor is correct

So what does it mean if bit 21 is 0 on 6180/6192?

If [21] == 0 is not supported on 6180/6192 because those parts
officially only support 166 MHz TCLK operation, then that doesn't
need a test for the part number, I think.