From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Iain Paton Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 08:52:02 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 1/3] sunxi: sun4i: improve cpu clock selection method In-Reply-To: <5517F29C.2070005@redhat.com> References: <55168198.5030207@gmail.com> <5517F29C.2070005@redhat.com> Message-ID: <551900A2.3000905@gmail.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 29/03/15 13:39, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > On 28-03-15 11:25, Iain Paton wrote: >> clock_set_pll1 would pick the next highest available cpu clock speed if >> a value not in the pre defined table was selected. this potentially >> results in overclocking the soc. >> >> reverse the selection method so that we select the next lowest speed >> and add the missing 912Mhz setting that's requested by sun7i which also >> uses the sun4i clock code. >> >> Signed-off-by: Iain Paton > > Thanks for the new set. > > I've found one small issue with the second patch: > "sunxi: use CONFIG_SYS_CLK_FREQ to set cpu clock" > > sun7i.h contained the following: > > #define CONFIG_SYS_CLK_FREQ 24000000 > #define CONFIG_TIMER_CLK_FREQ CONFIG_SYS_CLK_FREQ > > Which is a conflicting usage of CONFIG_SYS_CLK_FREQ compared to the new > usage introduced by your patch. I've fixed this by changing the above > to: > > #define CONFIG_TIMER_CLK_FREQ 24000000 > > And run some compile and runtime tests. > > Everything builds and works fine with this change added, so I've pushed > these 3 commits + one other fix to: u-boot-sunxi/master Apologies for missing that. Thanks for the fixup. Did you see any compile or runtime errors? I definately did build and boot the result several times before sending it, especially to verify the behaviour of the first patch. So I'm curious as to how I missed it and you found the issue. Rgds, Iain