From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id A76C6E009C2; Thu, 21 May 2015 11:11:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on yocto-www.yoctoproject.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-HAM-Report: * -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low * trust * [193.201.172.118 listed in list.dnswl.org] * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider * (picmaster[at]mail.bg) * -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's * domain * 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily * valid * -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature Received: from mx2.mail.bg (mx2.mail.bg [193.201.172.118]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDAC2E00902 for ; Thu, 21 May 2015 11:11:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.62] (unknown [93.152.143.60]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx2.mail.bg (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B71F96000D71; Thu, 21 May 2015 21:11:18 +0300 (EEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=mail.bg; s=default; t=1432231878; bh=jnin6YWglkF8Q8RZj9+BZlrQLDWAunH9UVKN06t4skw=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=tHsziFBriDO1s3yalSQO31FVNslC40VWXcUNzameqBtGWHa6dETJ0hndMmVzvdjpJ 8fEDgx8HmbciYrtLZMKdAajpgUMy1TClpyHBQjk+x2ewzjW8KQQ60k+ZSw5CL7BIEg gZpSw8TMXb4vQUcRs7RKoLSMBP1QVtw7q5QzVyhI= Message-ID: <555E1FC6.3090602@mail.bg> Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 21:11:18 +0300 From: Nikolay Dimitrov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?UTF-8?B?RXJpYyBCw6luYXJk?= References: <555E071F.4080005@iwavesystems.com> <555E0AAF.4060104@mail.bg> <20150521192922.407488df@e6520eb.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20150521192922.407488df@e6520eb.localdomain> Cc: "meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org" Subject: Re: i.MX6 - PCIe not detecting some devices in Linux 3.14.28 X-BeenThere: meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Usage and development list for the meta-fsl-* layers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 18:11:27 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Eric, On 05/21/2015 08:29 PM, Eric Bénard wrote: > Hi Nikolay, > > Le Thu, 21 May 2015 19:41:19 +0300, > Nikolay Dimitrov a écrit : >> On 05/21/2015 07:26 PM, ansaris wrote: >>> Hi, >>> We are using imx6Q custom platform based on sabresd platform. For our >>> development we are using Linux 3.14.28_1.0.0-GA BSP but initially we >>> used Linux 3.10.53_1.0.0-GA BSP. >>> We have seen that the pcie driver file is updated in Linux 3.14.28. >>> >>> The problem we are facing is, we have a PCIe device which is SSD SATA. >>> With Linux 3.14.28_1.0.0-GA BSP, the PCIe-SATA is not getting detected >>> and it is showing below error. >>> imx6q-pcie 1ffc000.pcie: phy link never came up >>> imx6q-pcie 1ffc000.pcie: Failed to bring link up! >>> imx6q-pcie 1ffc000.pcie: failed to initialize host >>> imx6q-pcie: probe of 1ffc000.pcie failed with error -22 >>> >>> With Linux 3.10.53_1.0.0-GA BSP, the same PCIe-SATA is getting detected >>> and mounted as block device. >>> Here we have not changed any hardware. We just replaced the booting SD >>> card which contains Linux 3.10.53_1.0.0-GA BSP binaries. >>> >>> In addition, , we have checked with several PCIe devices (network PCIe >>> devices) with Linux 3.14.28_1.0.0-GA BSP. Only some of the PCIe devices >>> are getting detected. >>> Please note that, all the devices are getting detected in the Linux >>> 3.10.53_1.0.0-GA BSP. >>> >>> Please help us to resolve this issue. >> >> Please clarify whether your device is PCIe or SATA - it can be only one >> of those, not both at the same time. >> > FWIW newer M.2 boards directly expose a PCIe interface and embed a SATA > controler which (I believe) expose one drive but balances the load > between several SATA SSD to get better performances. > So the host only see a PCIe interface but the board has both PCIe and > SATA inside (and the host needs both PCIe and AHCI support) : > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M.2 > http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-XP941-512GB-AHCI-80mm/dp/B00JOSM3TK > http://www.bjorn3d.com/2015/03/480gb-hyperx-predator-m-2-pcie-ssd-shpm2280p2480g/ > (M.2 SSD also exist with a SATA interface directly exposed but they have > a different keying on the connector to prevent the mismatch which is > possible with mSATA vs mPCIe). Ahh, I see. I was thinking about SATA mostly as physical interface, not as a PCIe-based controller... Yes, you're correct - in this case PCIe will have to be enabled and working, for sure, and the device's specific driver (could be a generic SATA?) should also be enabled. @ansaris - I'm not an expert in PCIe, but you can check whether your board generates a proper PCIe reference clock. Regards, Nikolay