Andy Fleming wrote:
On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 4:53 PM, Kim Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jul 2008 14:43:46 -0400
Paul Gortmaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some boards that have external 16550 UARTs don't have a direct
tie between bi_busfreq and the clock used for the UARTs. Boards
On Aug 15, 2008, at 9:23 AM, Zach Sadecki wrote:
Andy Fleming wrote:
On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 4:53 PM, Kim Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jul 2008 14:43:46 -0400
Paul Gortmaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some boards that have external 16550 UARTs don't have a direct
tie
How do you have CFG_NS16550_CLK defined on you board? is the the freq
for the SOC UARTs?
if so you can just update your lbc clocks in your own board code after
you call ft_cpu_setup()
- k
CFG_NS16550_CLK is defined as get_bus_freq(0). The SOC UARTs work, but
without the previously
On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 4:53 PM, Kim Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jul 2008 14:43:46 -0400
Paul Gortmaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some boards that have external 16550 UARTs don't have a direct
tie between bi_busfreq and the clock used for the UARTs. Boards
that do have such a
Some boards that have external 16550 UARTs don't have a direct
tie between bi_busfreq and the clock used for the UARTs. Boards
that do have such a tie should set CFG_NS16550_CLK to be
get_bus_freq(0) -- which most of them do already.
Signed-off-by: Paul Gortmaker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
(Just
On Wed, 9 Jul 2008 14:43:46 -0400
Paul Gortmaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some boards that have external 16550 UARTs don't have a direct
tie between bi_busfreq and the clock used for the UARTs. Boards
that do have such a tie should set CFG_NS16550_CLK to be
get_bus_freq(0) -- which most of
