[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOMZO5Cr3k+oy_Sf0kL9gge7bwqkvJR8BQhY-FvxVXN00A2ARw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2020 11:25:50 -0300
From: Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>
To: Sven Van Asbroeck <thesven73@...il.com>
Cc: Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>, Fugang Duan <fugang.duan@....com>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@....com>,
"moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] ARM: imx6plus: enable internal routing of
clk_enet_ref where possible
Hi Sven,
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 10:40 AM Sven Van Asbroeck <thesven73@...il.com> wrote:
> Thank you for testing this out on a different platform !
>
> I had a look at how things are done in the Freescale fork of the kernel
> (5.4.24_2.1.0) and I noticed that this kernel has almost the same
> behaviour as this proposed patch: the GPR5 bit is _always_ set
> on a plus. The code does not check how the enet clock is generated.
>
> https://source.codeaurora.org/external/imx/linux-imx/tree/arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6q.c?h=rel_imx_5.4.24_2.1.0&id=babac008e5cf168abca1a85bda2e8071ca27a5c0#n269
>
> Now, I'm assuming that the sabresd-plus can run on the Freescale
> kernel fork. The GPR5 bit will always be set there.
Just tested 5.4.24_2.1.0 on an imx6qp sabresd and DHCP also fails there.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists