[U-Boot] [PATCH] blackfin: Fix using gd->baudrate before setting its value

[Axel Lin]

2013/7/1 Sonic Zhang <sonic.adi at gmail.com>:
> Hi Axel,
>
> On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 8:34 AM, Axel Lin <axel.lin at ingics.com> wrote:
>> Current code uses gd->baudrate before setting its value.
>> Besides, I got below build warning which is introduced by
>> commit ddb5c5be "blackfin: add baudrate to bdinfo".
>>
>> board.c:235:3: warning: passing argument 1 of 'simple_strtoul' makes pointer from integer without a cast [enabled by default]
>> include/vsprintf.h:27:7: note: expected 'const char *' but argument is of type 'unsigned int'
>>
>> This patch moves the code using gd->baudrate to be after init_baudrate() call,
>> this ensures we get the baudrate setting before using it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Axel Lin <axel.lin at ingics.com>
>> ---
>> I forgot to CC u-boot mail list. here is a resend.
>>
>> Hi,
>> I don't have this hardware to test.
>> I'd appreciate if someone can test it.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Axel
>>  arch/blackfin/lib/board.c | 3 +--
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/blackfin/lib/board.c b/arch/blackfin/lib/board.c
>> index f1d5547..9e2e9de 100644
>> --- a/arch/blackfin/lib/board.c
>> +++ b/arch/blackfin/lib/board.c
>> @@ -231,8 +231,6 @@ static int global_board_data_init(void)
>>         bd->bi_sclk = get_sclk();
>>         bd->bi_memstart = CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE;
>>         bd->bi_memsize = CONFIG_SYS_MAX_RAM_SIZE;
>> -       bd->bi_baudrate = (gd->baudrate > 0)
>> -               ? simple_strtoul(gd->baudrate, NULL, 10) : CONFIG_BAUDRATE;
>>
>>         return 0;
>>  }
>> @@ -299,6 +297,7 @@ void board_init_f(ulong bootflag)
>>         env_init();
>>         serial_early_puts("Baudrate init\n");
>>         init_baudrate();
>> +       gd->bd->bi_baudrate = gd->baudrate;
>
> I prefer to move this line into init_baudrate().
hi Sonic,

$ grep -r "int init_baudrate" -A 4 arch
It shows we have the same implementation for all supported architectures.

So I think init_baudrate() may be moved to a common place in the future.
I pernsonal prefer keep the code as is in this patch.
But if you insist on moving this line into init_baudrate(), I have no problem
to send a v2. Just let me know how do you think.

Thanks for the review,
Axel