On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 2:49 PM, Xavi Drudis Ferran wrote:
> Thank you amd feel free to suggest more tests, but it is good enough
> as it is for me.
Ok, thanks for trying. So let's keep the SPDIF parent clock as is.
El Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 03:49:25PM +0200, Xavi Drudis Ferran deia:
> El Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 10:11:13AM -0300, Fabio Estevam deia:
> > 2. SPDIF clock rate not accurate. Probably using PLL4 as SPDIF source
> > would help to get more accurate SPDIF clock rates.
> >
> > Could you please try the
Hi Xavi,
On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 10:47 AM, Xavi Drudis Ferran wrote:
> If it's easy for you to send it yourself, I would prefer so and I'm
> grateful. If not, it'll be an exercise for me, no problem.
I have just submitted the patch with you on Cc.
If you could reply to it
El Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 10:11:13AM -0300, Fabio Estevam deia:
> 2. SPDIF clock rate not accurate. Probably using PLL4 as SPDIF source
> would help to get more accurate SPDIF clock rates.
>
> Could you please try the untested change?
>
> --- a/drivers/clk/imx/clk-imx6q.c
> +++
El Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 10:30:25AM -0300, Fabio Estevam deia:
> Xavi,
>
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
>
> > Xavi,
> >
> > Care to send a formal patch with your change?
>
> If you prefer, I can send this change to the ARM kernel mailing list.
>
Xavi,
On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> Xavi,
>
> Care to send a formal patch with your change?
If you prefer, I can send this change to the ARM kernel mailing list.
Please let me know what you prefer.
Thanks
Hi Xavi/Nicolin,
On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 6:10 AM, Xavi Drudis Ferran wrote:
> El Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 09:21:01PM -0700, Nicolin Chen deia:
>>
>> No, the problem is not at the rate but the source -- Although the
>> MLB clock exists in the clock tree as a better rate provider,