From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Diego A. Fons" Subject: Re: Problem with FB Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 14:33:49 -0300 Message-ID: <4655CC7D.6020600@apexar.com> References: <464B3527.4080406@apexar.com> <464D5A56.4070906@rfo.atmel.com> <464DA279.6070404@apexar.com> <464DA8FA.6050303@rfo.atmel.com> Reply-To: linux-fbdev-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx2-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.92] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list1-new.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HrHAr-0002a3-T1 for linux-fbdev-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 24 May 2007 10:32:30 -0700 Received: from smtp1.allytech.com ([200.49.145.100] helo=ns1.arsesco.com.ar) by mail.sourceforge.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.44) id 1HrHAq-0008P8-I2 for linux-fbdev-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 24 May 2007 10:32:29 -0700 In-Reply-To: <464DA8FA.6050303@rfo.atmel.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-fbdev-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: linux-fbdev-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net To: nicolas.ferre@rfo.atmel.com Cc: linux-fbdev-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Nicolas Ferre escribi=F3: >Diego A. Fons : > = > >>Nicolas Ferre escribi=F3: >> >> = >> >>>Diego A. Fons : >>> = >>> >>> = >>> >>>>Hi, >>>> >>>>First of all i'm not sure if it is the correct list for posting this = >>>>mail, if it's not, please tell me wich list is the correct one. >>>> >>>>I'm working on an embedded device (a Ronetix pm9261 board with an = >>>>AT91SAM9261 cpu), i could build the linux kernel version 2.6.19.7 = >>>>with framebuffer support and it works fine. The problem is when i run = >>>>any command that uses net services, i.e. when i run sftp the sreen = >>>>moves and it kept like this, the offset (0,0) is in position (100,0) = >>>>(it's just an example, i don't know thw correct values) and i'm not = >>>>able to correct it. It occurs every time i run a net comand. The = >>>>display i'm usin is a LCD and the driver is sidsab.c. >>>> = >>>> = >>>> >>>Strange behavior is not it ;-) >>> >>>I have seen this before and it was due to a bad timing setup of the >>>dm9000 chip select. >>> >>>- at91_sys_write(AT91_SMC_CYCLE(2), AT91_SMC_NWECYCLE_(0) | = >>>AT91_SMC_NRDCYCLE_(16)); >>>+ at91_sys_write(AT91_SMC_CYCLE(2), AT91_SMC_NWECYCLE_(16) | = >>>AT91_SMC_NRDCYCLE_(16)); >>> >>>Is you have the first configuration, try with the second and it should >>>fix your problem. >>> >>>Hope that it helps. Tell us if it works. >>> >>>Regards, >>> = >>> >>> = >>> >>Thanks for replying! >> >>I search the line you describes and i could find something similar in = >>the initialization routine (attach) this is the similar line: >> >>at91_sys_write(AT91_SMC_CYCLE(2), \ >> ( AT91_DM9000_NWE_CYCLE | >> AT91_DM9000_NRD_CYCLE)); >> >>The macros are: >> >>#define AT91_DM9000_NWE_CYCLE (32 << 0) >>#define AT91_DM9000_NRD_CYCLE (32 << 16) >> >>Did you refer to that? or i have to look another place? >> = >> > >Definitely yes. (sorry I should have said that is was in board-xxxx9261.c >kind of files). > >In this case AT91_DM9000_NWE_CYCLE is... 32 ! So my patch does not apply >(we had to set it to 16 instead of 0 on our sam9261ek eval board). > >I think that ronetix is running the sam9261 at a higher speed than we do on >the Atmel sam9261ek : you should then reconsider the dm9000 timings (thoug= h they >seem to have adapted theirs already...). > >Tell us if you find the proper ones (or if it is another reason). >Regards, > = > Hi, Nicolas, (by the way, do you speak spanish? I ask you because of your name) I was changing the timings values but it seems to get worse, with a set = of values the screen moves with every ftp command thet sftp sends! Now the values are (it doesn't work either): #define AT91_DM9000_NWE_SETUP (8 << 0) #define AT91_DM9000_NCS_WR_SETUP (4 << 8) #define AT91_DM9000_NRD_SETUP (8 << 16) #define AT91_DM9000_NCS_RD_SETUP (4 << 24) #define AT91_DM9000_NWE_PULSE (16 << 0) #define AT91_DM9000_NCS_WR_PULSE (32 << 8) #define AT91_DM9000_NRD_PULSE (16 << 16) #define AT91_DM9000_NCS_RD_PULSE (32 << 24) #define AT91_DM9000_NWE_CYCLE (36 << 0) #define AT91_DM9000_NRD_CYCLE (36 << 16) #define AT91_DM9000_TDF (1 << 16) I test it with lower and higher values and nothing (with 1 and 127). Can you tell me how is it possible that the DM9000 timings interfere = with the frame buffer? is it possible that other device gets interfered = and i'm not seeing it? Regards, Diego A. Fons. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/