On 01/20/2017 02:14 PM, Scott Wood wrote: > On Fri, 2017-01-20 at 21:38 +0000, york sun wrote: >> On 01/20/2017 01:36 PM, Scott Wood wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, 2017-01-20 at 16:28 +0000, york sun wrote: >>>>
<snip> >>>> >>>> Why fixing up this clock causes incorect frequency value? The macro >>>> CONFIG_SYS_CLK_FREQ is defined as 125MHz for ls1012a. >>> Because ls1012a has two different input frequencies -- 125 MHz for the >>> platform PLL and 100 MHz for the core PLLs. When we added a second fixed- >>> clock node for the latter, U-Boot was overwriting it. >>> >>> While the ifdef solves this immediate problem, it doesn't fix the >>> underlying >>> problem that this fixup is overly broad. It should identify the specific >>> node >>> it's looking for, and not overwrite every fixed-clock node it finds. >>> >> So current code tries to fix up any node with "fixed-clock"? That's not >> good. What if we have multiple fixed clocks? >> > > That is exactly the problem. This patch avoids the issue on ls1012a but not > in general. > Then a proper fix would be check the clock name or compatible. If none of them exists, we should fix the device tree first. York _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
