Hi Stefano,
On 09/05/2017 06:30 AM, Stefano Babic wrote:
On 05/09/2017 14:56, Fabio Estevam wrote:
Hi Eric,
On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 11:37 PM, Eric Nelson <ericnelso...@gmail.com> wrote:
--- a/include/configs/mx6sabre_common.h
+++ b/include/configs/mx6sabre_common.h
@@ -225,7 +225,11 @@
#define CONFIG_BMP_16BPP
#define CONFIG_VIDEO_LOGO
#define CONFIG_VIDEO_BMP_LOGO
-#define CONFIG_IPUV3_CLK 260000000
+#ifdef CONFIG_MX6DL
+#define CONFIG_IPUV3_CLK 198000000
+#else
+#define CONFIG_IPUV3_CLK 264000000
+#endif
Note that this should probably be applied for other boards
which are compiled for multiple CPU types.
At least the Boundary Nitrogen boards, but probably others
like Wand have ordering options for DL or Solo processors
and may need the reduced clock rate.
Agreed. The clock frequency decision should be done in run-time rather
than in build-time.
I agree, too. We have mechanism to take decisions at run time, at least
based on SOC type. Anyway, Anatolji has already merged this - should be
better to revert it ?
I don't think it should be reverted until we have a run-time decision
in place, or we'll re-introduce whatever problem the higher rate
caused, at least on SABRE boards with Solo or Dual-Lite processors.
I'm still wondering whether Peng has a description of the ramifications
of the higher rate on DL/Solo processors.
Regards,
Eric
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
