From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ra.tuxdriver.com (ra.tuxdriver.com [24.172.12.4]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4539967A85 for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2005 07:30:01 +1100 (EST) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 15:29:15 -0500 From: "John W. Linville" To: "Povolotsky, Alexander" Message-ID: <20050118202913.GC6883@tuxdriver.com> References: <313680C9A886D511A06000204840E1CF0A647502@whq-msgusr-02.pit.comms.marconi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <313680C9A886D511A06000204840E1CF0A647502@whq-msgusr-02.pit.comms.marconi.com> Cc: 'Steven Blakeslee' , "'linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org'" Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.10-rc3 8xx: debugging (over-writing) content of b d_in fo structure in the kernel booting code List-Id: Linux on Embedded PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 02:08:19PM -0500, Povolotsky, Alexander wrote: > My board is using: > > bd->bi_intfreq = 50000000; > bd->bi_busfreq = 50000000; > > While RPX-Lite is using > > bd->bi_intfreq = 48000000; > bd->bi_busfreq = 48000000; > > Is this what makes RPX-Lite work and my (MPC 880) not ? That, of course, depends on which value is correct for your board... :-) When I mentioned in one of our (possibly off-line) exchanges that _slightly_ incorrect clock speeds might explain how you get a few good characters from the serial port before you get all that garbage, this is the kind of descrepancy I was suggesting. There may be enough "slop" in the timings of the relatively slow serial port to make 48MHz and 50MHz "close enough" for a few characters. So, what is the correct number for your board? Do you know how to identify an oscillator? They have a bit of a 'tin can' look to them. Find the one closest to the CPU on the board, and see what number is on it. John -- John W. Linville linville@tuxdriver.com