> No, it shouldn't -- rx_bd_base is of type "cbd_t *", so the multiplication
> already happens as part of pointer arithmetic.
---Yes, you are right. I made a basic mistake.
But now I have another question.
The SMC1 params can be relocated to any offset of the DPRAM on a 64 byte
boundary, not as the SCC1, which must be at 0x8000 offset of the DPRAM.
The SMC1 params base is set at 0x87FC offset of the DPRAM.
So if I want SMC1 params start at 0x200 in DPRAM , I should set 0x200 to the
0x87FC offset of the DPRAM.
I have see this code in u-boot, but I can not find this code in neither
cpm_uart_cpm2.c nor cpm_uart_core.c.
Should I add these code to cpm_uart_core.c?
--dp_mem = cpm_dpram_addr(0x87fc);
--out_be16(dp_mem, SMC1_BASE);
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Wood" <scottw...@freescale.com>
To: "hellohello" <hellohello...@163.com>
Cc: <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Sent: Friday, May 21, 2010 1:06 AM
Subject: Re: Problem of PowerPc 82xx when using smc
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 04:58:27PM +0800, hellohello wrote:
>>
>> I find a problem in
>> drivers/serial/cpm_uart/cpm_uart_cpm2.c:
>> int cpm_uart_allocbuf(struct uart_cpm_port *pinfo, unsigned int is_con)
>> {
>> ... ...
>> pinfo->tx_bd_base = pinfo->rx_bd_base + pinfo->rx_nrfifos;
>> /*The above line should be ：*/
>> pinfo->tx_bd_base = pinfo->rx_bd_base + sizeof(cbd_t) * pinfo->rx_nrfifos;
>
> No, it shouldn't -- rx_bd_base is of type "cbd_t *", so the multiplication
> already happens as part of pointer arithmetic.
>
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> Where to get the newest code for kernel?
>
> git.kernel.org
>
>> How to know whether it is already patched by anyone else? Just search in
>> this mail list?
>
> As well as the current git tree.
>
> -Scott
> _______________________________________________
> Linuxppc-dev mailing list
> Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
> https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
