* [PATCH] PowerPC 440EPx Sequoia USB OHCI DTS entry
@ 2007-10-08 14:26 Valentine Barshak
2007-10-23 15:33 ` Josh Boyer
2007-10-23 17:03 ` Segher Boessenkool
0 siblings, 2 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Valentine Barshak @ 2007-10-08 14:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linuxppc-dev; +Cc: linux-usb-devel
PowerPC 440EPx Sequoia USB OHCI device tree entry.
Signed-off-by: Valentine Barshak <vbarshak@ru.mvista.com>
---
arch/powerpc/boot/dts/sequoia.dts | 7 +++++++
1 files changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff -pruN linux-2.6.orig/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/sequoia.dts linux-2.6/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/sequoia.dts
--- linux-2.6.orig/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/sequoia.dts 2007-10-08 16:29:54.000000000 +0400
+++ linux-2.6/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/sequoia.dts 2007-10-08 17:56:05.000000000 +0400
@@ -122,6 +122,13 @@
interrupt-map-mask = <ffffffff>;
};
+ USB1: usb@e0000400 {
+ compatible = "ohci-be";
+ reg = <0 e0000400 60>;
+ interrupt-parent = <&UIC0>;
+ interrupts = <15 8>;
+ };
+
POB0: opb {
compatible = "ibm,opb-440epx", "ibm,opb";
#address-cells = <1>;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] PowerPC 440EPx Sequoia USB OHCI DTS entry
2007-10-08 14:26 [PATCH] PowerPC 440EPx Sequoia USB OHCI DTS entry Valentine Barshak
@ 2007-10-23 15:33 ` Josh Boyer
2007-10-23 15:35 ` Valentine Barshak
2007-10-23 17:03 ` Segher Boessenkool
1 sibling, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Josh Boyer @ 2007-10-23 15:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Valentine Barshak; +Cc: linuxppc-dev, linux-usb-devel
On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 18:26:58 +0400
Valentine Barshak <vbarshak@ru.mvista.com> wrote:
> PowerPC 440EPx Sequoia USB OHCI device tree entry.
>
> Signed-off-by: Valentine Barshak <vbarshak@ru.mvista.com>
I think I saw the OHCI big endian quirk patch go into Linus' tree
recently. Is that the only patch this one depends on?
josh
> ---
> arch/powerpc/boot/dts/sequoia.dts | 7 +++++++
> 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+)
>
> diff -pruN linux-2.6.orig/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/sequoia.dts linux-2.6/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/sequoia.dts
> --- linux-2.6.orig/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/sequoia.dts 2007-10-08 16:29:54.000000000 +0400
> +++ linux-2.6/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/sequoia.dts 2007-10-08 17:56:05.000000000 +0400
> @@ -122,6 +122,13 @@
> interrupt-map-mask = <ffffffff>;
> };
>
> + USB1: usb@e0000400 {
> + compatible = "ohci-be";
> + reg = <0 e0000400 60>;
> + interrupt-parent = <&UIC0>;
> + interrupts = <15 8>;
> + };
> +
> POB0: opb {
> compatible = "ibm,opb-440epx", "ibm,opb";
> #address-cells = <1>;
> _______________________________________________
> Linuxppc-dev mailing list
> Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
> https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] PowerPC 440EPx Sequoia USB OHCI DTS entry
2007-10-23 15:33 ` Josh Boyer
@ 2007-10-23 15:35 ` Valentine Barshak
2007-10-23 15:50 ` Josh Boyer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Valentine Barshak @ 2007-10-23 15:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Josh Boyer; +Cc: linuxppc-dev, linux-usb-devel
Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 18:26:58 +0400
> Valentine Barshak <vbarshak@ru.mvista.com> wrote:
>
>> PowerPC 440EPx Sequoia USB OHCI device tree entry.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Valentine Barshak <vbarshak@ru.mvista.com>
>
> I think I saw the OHCI big endian quirk patch go into Linus' tree
> recently. Is that the only patch this one depends on?
>
Yes, now we only need a dts entry to enable ohci support for 440EP(x),
Valentine.
> josh
>
>> ---
>> arch/powerpc/boot/dts/sequoia.dts | 7 +++++++
>> 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff -pruN linux-2.6.orig/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/sequoia.dts linux-2.6/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/sequoia.dts
>> --- linux-2.6.orig/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/sequoia.dts 2007-10-08 16:29:54.000000000 +0400
>> +++ linux-2.6/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/sequoia.dts 2007-10-08 17:56:05.000000000 +0400
>> @@ -122,6 +122,13 @@
>> interrupt-map-mask = <ffffffff>;
>> };
>>
>> + USB1: usb@e0000400 {
>> + compatible = "ohci-be";
>> + reg = <0 e0000400 60>;
>> + interrupt-parent = <&UIC0>;
>> + interrupts = <15 8>;
>> + };
>> +
>> POB0: opb {
>> compatible = "ibm,opb-440epx", "ibm,opb";
>> #address-cells = <1>;
>> _______________________________________________
>> Linuxppc-dev mailing list
>> Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
>> https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] PowerPC 440EPx Sequoia USB OHCI DTS entry
2007-10-23 15:35 ` Valentine Barshak
@ 2007-10-23 15:50 ` Josh Boyer
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Josh Boyer @ 2007-10-23 15:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Valentine Barshak; +Cc: linuxppc-dev, linux-usb-devel
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 19:35:09 +0400
Valentine Barshak <vbarshak@ru.mvista.com> wrote:
> Josh Boyer wrote:
> > On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 18:26:58 +0400
> > Valentine Barshak <vbarshak@ru.mvista.com> wrote:
> >
> >> PowerPC 440EPx Sequoia USB OHCI device tree entry.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Valentine Barshak <vbarshak@ru.mvista.com>
> >
> > I think I saw the OHCI big endian quirk patch go into Linus' tree
> > recently. Is that the only patch this one depends on?
> >
>
> Yes, now we only need a dts entry to enable ohci support for 440EP(x),
> Valentine.
Ok. I'll queue up this patch in a bit. Thanks.
josh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] PowerPC 440EPx Sequoia USB OHCI DTS entry
2007-10-08 14:26 [PATCH] PowerPC 440EPx Sequoia USB OHCI DTS entry Valentine Barshak
2007-10-23 15:33 ` Josh Boyer
@ 2007-10-23 17:03 ` Segher Boessenkool
2007-10-23 17:18 ` Valentine Barshak
1 sibling, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Segher Boessenkool @ 2007-10-23 17:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Valentine Barshak; +Cc: linuxppc-dev, linux-usb-devel
> + compatible = "ohci-be";
Can we fix this please, in the same way as with EHCI? I.e., the
"compatible" should say it is USB, e.g. "usb-ohci"; and the
"big-endian" quirkiness should be expressed by a property, not by
the "compatible" name (since that would lead to exponential
explosion of all possible combinations of quirks, if nothing else).
Segher
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] PowerPC 440EPx Sequoia USB OHCI DTS entry
2007-10-23 17:03 ` Segher Boessenkool
@ 2007-10-23 17:18 ` Valentine Barshak
2007-10-23 21:40 ` Dale Farnsworth
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Valentine Barshak @ 2007-10-23 17:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Segher Boessenkool; +Cc: linuxppc-dev, linux-usb-devel
Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>> + compatible = "ohci-be";
>
> Can we fix this please, in the same way as with EHCI? I.e., the
> "compatible" should say it is USB, e.g. "usb-ohci"; and the
> "big-endian" quirkiness should be expressed by a property, not by
> the "compatible" name (since that would lead to exponential
> explosion of all possible combinations of quirks, if nothing else).
>
>
> Segher
>
I was thinking about it too.
We need to fix the OHCI OF driver and all its users' dts files (if any).
Actually I also don't see much reason for the
USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_BE/USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE stuff.
Is this really needed?
Thanks,
Valentine.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] PowerPC 440EPx Sequoia USB OHCI DTS entry
2007-10-23 17:18 ` Valentine Barshak
@ 2007-10-23 21:40 ` Dale Farnsworth
2007-10-24 11:19 ` Valentine Barshak
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Dale Farnsworth @ 2007-10-23 21:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: vbarshak, Linuxppc-dev
Valentine wrote:
> Actually I also don't see much reason for the
> USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_BE/USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE stuff.
> Is this really needed?
I think so. The SOC host controllers are BE and the PCI
host controllers are LE. Or, do you have an alternative
method of handling both types?
-Dale
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] PowerPC 440EPx Sequoia USB OHCI DTS entry
2007-10-23 21:40 ` Dale Farnsworth
@ 2007-10-24 11:19 ` Valentine Barshak
2007-10-24 12:08 ` Dale Farnsworth
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Valentine Barshak @ 2007-10-24 11:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dale Farnsworth; +Cc: Linuxppc-dev
Dale Farnsworth wrote:
> Valentine wrote:
>> Actually I also don't see much reason for the
>> USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_BE/USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE stuff.
>> Is this really needed?
>
> I think so. The SOC host controllers are BE and the PCI
> host controllers are LE. Or, do you have an alternative
> method of handling both types?
>
> -Dale
Yes, PCI controllers are LE, but do we really need user-selectable
USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE option, since USB_OHCI_LITTLE_ENDIAN is selected
by default for USB_OHCI_HCD_PCI?
The USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE/BE stuff is related to PPC OF glue only.
I think it's useless. We should always enable
USB_OHCI_BIG_ENDIAN_DESC and USB_OHCI_BIG_ENDIAN_MMIO for PPC OF
and the real LE/BE implementation should be selected by the
corresponding properties in the device tree.
Thanks,
Valentine.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] PowerPC 440EPx Sequoia USB OHCI DTS entry
2007-10-24 11:19 ` Valentine Barshak
@ 2007-10-24 12:08 ` Dale Farnsworth
2007-10-24 13:44 ` Valentine Barshak
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Dale Farnsworth @ 2007-10-24 12:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Valentine Barshak; +Cc: Linuxppc-dev
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 03:19:14PM +0400, Valentine Barshak wrote:
> Dale Farnsworth wrote:
> >Valentine wrote:
> >>Actually I also don't see much reason for the
> >>USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_BE/USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE stuff.
> >>Is this really needed?
> >
> >I think so. The SOC host controllers are BE and the PCI
> >host controllers are LE. Or, do you have an alternative
> >method of handling both types?
>
> Yes, PCI controllers are LE, but do we really need user-selectable
> USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE option, since USB_OHCI_LITTLE_ENDIAN is selected
> by default for USB_OHCI_HCD_PCI?
> The USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE/BE stuff is related to PPC OF glue only.
> I think it's useless. We should always enable
> USB_OHCI_BIG_ENDIAN_DESC and USB_OHCI_BIG_ENDIAN_MMIO for PPC OF
> and the real LE/BE implementation should be selected by the
> corresponding properties in the device tree.
I agree that they don't need to be user selectable. It is far preferable
to deduce their values from existing information, if possible.
-Dale
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] PowerPC 440EPx Sequoia USB OHCI DTS entry
2007-10-24 12:08 ` Dale Farnsworth
@ 2007-10-24 13:44 ` Valentine Barshak
2007-10-24 14:10 ` Dale Farnsworth
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Valentine Barshak @ 2007-10-24 13:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dale Farnsworth; +Cc: Linuxppc-dev
Dale Farnsworth wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 03:19:14PM +0400, Valentine Barshak wrote:
>> Dale Farnsworth wrote:
>>> Valentine wrote:
>>>> Actually I also don't see much reason for the
>>>> USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_BE/USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE stuff.
>>>> Is this really needed?
>>> I think so. The SOC host controllers are BE and the PCI
>>> host controllers are LE. Or, do you have an alternative
>>> method of handling both types?
>> Yes, PCI controllers are LE, but do we really need user-selectable
>> USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE option, since USB_OHCI_LITTLE_ENDIAN is selected
>> by default for USB_OHCI_HCD_PCI?
>> The USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE/BE stuff is related to PPC OF glue only.
>> I think it's useless. We should always enable
>> USB_OHCI_BIG_ENDIAN_DESC and USB_OHCI_BIG_ENDIAN_MMIO for PPC OF
>> and the real LE/BE implementation should be selected by the
>> corresponding properties in the device tree.
>
> I agree that they don't need to be user selectable. It is far preferable
> to deduce their values from existing information, if possible.
>
> -Dale
This is the original thread:
http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-embedded/2006-November/025054.html
I think the USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE/BE should be removed.
We can't avoid the slight overhead even using these options, since
USB_OHCI_BIG_ENDIAN_MMIO/DESC should always be anabled for PPC OF and we
we still enable USB_OHCI_LITTLE_ENDIAN for USB_OHCI_HCD_PCI even if
USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE is not set.
Thanks,
Valentine.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] PowerPC 440EPx Sequoia USB OHCI DTS entry
2007-10-24 13:44 ` Valentine Barshak
@ 2007-10-24 14:10 ` Dale Farnsworth
2007-10-24 14:23 ` Valentine Barshak
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Dale Farnsworth @ 2007-10-24 14:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Valentine Barshak; +Cc: Linuxppc-dev
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 05:44:51PM +0400, Valentine Barshak wrote:
> Dale Farnsworth wrote:
> >On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 03:19:14PM +0400, Valentine Barshak wrote:
> >>Dale Farnsworth wrote:
> >>>Valentine wrote:
> >>>>Actually I also don't see much reason for the
> >>>>USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_BE/USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE stuff.
> >>>>Is this really needed?
> >>>I think so. The SOC host controllers are BE and the PCI
> >>>host controllers are LE. Or, do you have an alternative
> >>>method of handling both types?
> >>Yes, PCI controllers are LE, but do we really need user-selectable
> >>USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE option, since USB_OHCI_LITTLE_ENDIAN is selected
> >>by default for USB_OHCI_HCD_PCI?
> >>The USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE/BE stuff is related to PPC OF glue only.
> >>I think it's useless. We should always enable
> >>USB_OHCI_BIG_ENDIAN_DESC and USB_OHCI_BIG_ENDIAN_MMIO for PPC OF
> >>and the real LE/BE implementation should be selected by the
> >>corresponding properties in the device tree.
> >
> >I agree that they don't need to be user selectable. It is far preferable
> >to deduce their values from existing information, if possible.
> >
> >-Dale
>
> This is the original thread:
> http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-embedded/2006-November/025054.html
>
> I think the USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE/BE should be removed.
> We can't avoid the slight overhead even using these options, since
> USB_OHCI_BIG_ENDIAN_MMIO/DESC should always be anabled for PPC OF and we
> we still enable USB_OHCI_LITTLE_ENDIAN for USB_OHCI_HCD_PCI even if
> USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE is not set.
I believe you are saying that we can select any valid combination
of USB_OHCI_BIG_ENDIAN_DESC, USB_OHCI_BIG_ENDIAN_MMIO, and
USB_OHCI_LITTLE_ENDIAN, without using USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_BE and
USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE. I agree. It looks like we can get rid of
these last two with zero loss in performance or functionality.
Do you have a patch?
-Dale
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] PowerPC 440EPx Sequoia USB OHCI DTS entry
2007-10-24 14:10 ` Dale Farnsworth
@ 2007-10-24 14:23 ` Valentine Barshak
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Valentine Barshak @ 2007-10-24 14:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dale Farnsworth; +Cc: Linuxppc-dev
Dale Farnsworth wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 05:44:51PM +0400, Valentine Barshak wrote:
>> Dale Farnsworth wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 03:19:14PM +0400, Valentine Barshak wrote:
>>>> Dale Farnsworth wrote:
>>>>> Valentine wrote:
>>>>>> Actually I also don't see much reason for the
>>>>>> USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_BE/USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE stuff.
>>>>>> Is this really needed?
>>>>> I think so. The SOC host controllers are BE and the PCI
>>>>> host controllers are LE. Or, do you have an alternative
>>>>> method of handling both types?
>>>> Yes, PCI controllers are LE, but do we really need user-selectable
>>>> USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE option, since USB_OHCI_LITTLE_ENDIAN is selected
>>>> by default for USB_OHCI_HCD_PCI?
>>>> The USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE/BE stuff is related to PPC OF glue only.
>>>> I think it's useless. We should always enable
>>>> USB_OHCI_BIG_ENDIAN_DESC and USB_OHCI_BIG_ENDIAN_MMIO for PPC OF
>>>> and the real LE/BE implementation should be selected by the
>>>> corresponding properties in the device tree.
>>> I agree that they don't need to be user selectable. It is far preferable
>>> to deduce their values from existing information, if possible.
>>>
>>> -Dale
>> This is the original thread:
>> http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-embedded/2006-November/025054.html
>>
>> I think the USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE/BE should be removed.
>> We can't avoid the slight overhead even using these options, since
>> USB_OHCI_BIG_ENDIAN_MMIO/DESC should always be anabled for PPC OF and we
>> we still enable USB_OHCI_LITTLE_ENDIAN for USB_OHCI_HCD_PCI even if
>> USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE is not set.
>
> I believe you are saying that we can select any valid combination
> of USB_OHCI_BIG_ENDIAN_DESC, USB_OHCI_BIG_ENDIAN_MMIO, and
> USB_OHCI_LITTLE_ENDIAN, without using USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_BE and
> USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE. I agree. It looks like we can get rid of
> these last two with zero loss in performance or functionality.
>
> Do you have a patch?
No I don't have it yet :)
I planed to make, test and submit it a bit later.
Thanks,
Valentine.
>
> -Dale
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-10-24 14:23 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2007-10-08 14:26 [PATCH] PowerPC 440EPx Sequoia USB OHCI DTS entry Valentine Barshak
2007-10-23 15:33 ` Josh Boyer
2007-10-23 15:35 ` Valentine Barshak
2007-10-23 15:50 ` Josh Boyer
2007-10-23 17:03 ` Segher Boessenkool
2007-10-23 17:18 ` Valentine Barshak
2007-10-23 21:40 ` Dale Farnsworth
2007-10-24 11:19 ` Valentine Barshak
2007-10-24 12:08 ` Dale Farnsworth
2007-10-24 13:44 ` Valentine Barshak
2007-10-24 14:10 ` Dale Farnsworth
2007-10-24 14:23 ` Valentine Barshak
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).