Hi Andreas, On 10/29/2014 11:24 AM, Andreas Bießmann wrote:
[snip]
>diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-at91/clk.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-at91/clk.h >index 4076a78..21ce2db 100644 >--- a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-at91/clk.h >+++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-at91/clk.h >@@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ > #define __ASM_ARM_ARCH_CLK_H__ > > #include <asm/arch/hardware.h> >+#include <asm/arch/at91_pmc.h> > #include <asm/global_data.h> > > static inline unsigned long get_cpu_clk_rate(void)Could we please rewrite this peace of code like this: #ifdef CPU_HAS_H32MXDIV static inline unsigned int get_h32mxdiv(void) { at91_pmc_t *pmc = (at91_pmc_t *)ATMEL_BASE_PMC; return readl(pmc->mckr) & (AT91_PMC_MCKR_H32MXDIV)); } #else static inline unsigned int get_h32mxdiv(void) { return 0; } #endif static inline unsigned long get_macb_pclk_rate(unsigned int dev_id) { if (get_h32mxdiv()) return get_mck_clk_rate() / 2; else return get_mck_clk_rate(); } and so forth The 'if'-path should be optimized away anyway and I feel the single get_clk_X functions will look nicer then.
OK, I will change the code like this. Thanks.
Rest of this series looks good and should be applied soon. Best Regards Andreas Bießmann
Best Regards, Bo Shen _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
