netdev - Re: [RFC 5/5] [powerpc] Implement a p1010rdb clock source.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 8 Aug 2011 09:44:24 -0500
From:	Robin Holt <holt@....com>
To:	Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>
Cc:	Robin Holt <holt@....com>, socketcan-core@...ts.berlios.de,
	U Bhaskar-B22300 <B22300@...escale.com>,
	Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 5/5] [powerpc] Implement a p1010rdb clock source.

On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 04:37:44PM +0200, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
> On 08/08/2011 04:21 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 04:16:27PM +0200, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
> >> On 08/08/2011 03:56 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
> >>>> commit 65bb8b060a873fa4f5188f2951081f6011259614
> >>>> Author: Bhaskar Upadhaya <Bhaskar.Upadhaya@...escale.com>
> >>>> Date:   Fri Mar 4 20:27:58 2011 +0530
> >>>
> >>> On a side note, that commit fixes up "fsl,flexcan-v1.0"
> >>> ...
> >>> +       do_fixup_by_compat_u32(blob, "fsl,flexcan-v1.0",
> >>> +                       "clock_freq", gd->bus_clk, 1);
> >>>
> >>> Should I go back to flexcan-v1.0 in my patches?
> >>
> >> Well, no. Let's wait. I don't think we need it. Also, it sets
> >> "clock_freq" while
> >>
> >>  http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v3.0.1/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/fsl-flexcan.txt
> >>
> >> documents "clock-frequencies"... :-(.
> > 
> > You answered a different question that I was asking.  I was asking if
> > I should change fsl,flexcan back to fsl,flexcan-v1.0 as documented on
> > line 5.  The clock_freq looks like a uboot change will need to be made
> > as well.
> 
> Well, I wrote above: "Well, no. Let's wait. I don't think we need it."
> 
> For the P1010 we can sinmply derive the clock frequency from
> "fsl_get_sys_freq()", which is fine for the time being. No extra
> properties, etc. The clk implemetation might go into
> 
>  http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v3.0.1/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/clock.c
> 
> or
> 
>  http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v3.0.1/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c
> 
> And may depend on HAVE_CAN_FLEXCAN
> 
> BTW, I have not found HAVE_CAN_FLEXCAN in your patch. What kernel are
> you using?

I am starting with the v3.0 kernel, apply one patch from the freescale BSP
we receive under NDA which introduces the P1010RDB board into the QorIQ
platform, and then work from there for the flexcan stuff.  That patch
introduces the HAVE_CAN_FLEXCAN.  I do not like how freescale structured
that Kconfig bit, so I have tweaked it to be selected automatically
when P1010RDB, NET, and CAN are selected.  That allows the CAN_FLEXCAN
selection to determine is we are going to build the flexcan.c file.

Our contact with Freescale would prefer that I not post that patch until
we get the OK from freescale to do so since we received it under NDA.

Robin
> 
> Wolfgang.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html