From: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger.com>
To: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
Cc: linuxppc-dev <Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>,
devicetree-discuss <devicetree-discuss@ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: Inconsistent fsl_get_sys_freq() implementation
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 09:48:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49D1CAD0.9040100@grandegger.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fa686aa40903310033n4284ab8l35147ee6f8b0db63@mail.gmail.com>
Grant Likely wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 1:28 AM, Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> we realized an inconsistent implementation of fsl_get_sys_freq():
>>
>> http://lxr.linux.no/linux+v2.6.29/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c#L80
>>
>> For 826x and 827x boards, the function is available but it cannot be
>> used because the "bus-frequency" property is not defined for the SOC and
>> U-Boot also does not try to do a fixup. I think that's a mistake, and
>> the DTS files and U-Boot should be fixed, right?
>> Furthermore, I find the name confusing. fsl_get_soc_bus_freq() would be
>> more appropriate also to distinguish from the frequencies of the CPU.
>> And why does the MPC52xx use a different name mpc52xx_find_ipb_freq()
>> for that frequency? It makes support for common hardware like I2C awkward.
>
> I haven't looked at fsl_get_soc_bus_freq(), but if the functions are
> duplicated, then I've got no problem changing the 52xx support to use
> common code.
The name used for devices using CONFIG_FSL_SOC is fsl_get_sys_freq(),
see the link above. Both functions return the bus frequency of the SOC
but they are implemented differently and allow some variation (which
needs some double-checking).
Wolfgang.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-31 7:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-31 7:28 Inconsistent fsl_get_sys_freq() implementation Wolfgang Grandegger
2009-03-31 7:33 ` Grant Likely
2009-03-31 7:48 ` Wolfgang Grandegger [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=49D1CAD0.9040100@grandegger.com \
--to=wg@grandegger.com \
--cc=Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=devicetree-discuss@ozlabs.org \
--cc=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).