On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 10:45:24AM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
>On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 04:08:49PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 03:45:06PM -0400, Solomon Peachy wrote:
>> >On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 10:06:30AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>[snip]
>> >> >+ UART0: ser...@ef600400 {
>> >> >+ device_type = "serial";
>> >> >+ compatible = "ns16550";
>> >> >+ reg = <0xef600400 0x00000008>;
>> >> >+ virtual-reg = <0xef600400>;
>> >> >+ clock-frequency = <0>; /* Filled in by
>> >> >zImage */
>> >> >+ current-speed = <0x9600>;
>> >>
>> >> Just a question, but is the baud supposed to be 38400 or 9600? At first
>> >> glance
>> >> it almost seems like a typo :).
>> >
>> >It's supposed to be 38400 baud, hence the explicit 0x in front. (I lost
>> >count of the number of times I saw '38400' listed in various dts
>> >files...)
>>
>> Cool. Just checking.
>
>Um.. except, surely it's clearer to just list 38400 in decimal, rather
>than 0x9600 which people are very likely to misread as 9600.
That was my point, yes. It is clearer, yes. It's his board though, so I'm
not going to nit-pick about it.
josh
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
