From: Scott Wood <oss@buserror.net>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] armv8/fsl-layerscape: add IFC fixup for LS1043A with QSPI enabled
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 21:38:56 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1459391936.32510.2.camel@buserror.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AM2PR04MB096481EC5CD29476A642629DE7980@AM2PR04MB0964.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 06:20 +0000, Qianyu Gong wrote:
> Hi Scott,
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Scott Wood [mailto:oss at buserror.net]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 4:45 AM
> > To: Qianyu Gong <qianyu.gong@nxp.com>; u-boot at lists.denx.de; york sun
> > <york.sun@nxp.com>
> > Cc: Mingkai Hu <mingkai.hu@nxp.com>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] armv8/fsl-layerscape: add IFC fixup for LS1043A with
> > QSPI
> > enabled
> >
> > On Fri, 2016-03-11 at 10:18 +0000, Qianyu Gong wrote:
> > > Hi Scott,
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Scott Wood [mailto:oss at buserror.net]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 8:12 AM
> > > > To: Qianyu Gong <qianyu.gong@nxp.com>; u-boot at lists.denx.de; york
> > > > sun <york.sun@nxp.com>
> > > > Cc: Mingkai Hu <mingkai.hu@nxp.com>
> > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] armv8/fsl-layerscape: add IFC fixup for LS1043A
> > > > with QSPI enabled
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 2016-02-22 at 18:05 +0800, Gong Qianyu wrote:
> > > > > QSPI and IFC are pin-multiplexed on LS1043A. So if QSPI is
> > > > > enabled, IFC should be disabled.
> > > > > But just disable IFC driver in LS1043A Linux is not enough because
> > > > > mdio-mux will access IFC address space -- actually it accesses
> > > > > FPGA which is connected to IFC CS3. So disable the whole IFC node
> > > > > in Linux device tree.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Gong Qianyu <Qianyu.Gong@nxp.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c
> > > > > b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c
> > > > > index 4e4861d..5bb3048 100644
> > > > > --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c
> > > > > +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c
> > > > > @@ -204,4 +204,11 @@ void ft_cpu_setup(void *blob, bd_t *bd)
> > > > > #ifdef
> > > > > CONFIG_FSL_LSCH3
> > > > > fdt_fixup_smmu(blob);
> > > > > #endif
> > > > > +
> > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_LS1043A
> > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_FSL_QSPI
> > > > > + do_fixup_by_compat(blob, "fsl,ifc",
> > > > > + "status", "disabled", 8 + 1, 1); #endif
> > > > > #endif
> > > > > }
> > > >
> > > > This muxing is done at runtime, right? It isn't a case of the board
> > > > hardwiring one or the other? In that case, it should be handled at
> > > > runtime here as well.
> > > > At a
> > > > minimum, allow the user to use hwconfig to choose which they want to
> > > > be accessible. Ideally there would be something in the device tree
> > > > to list the reason(s) for a device being disabled, so the OS knows
> > > > it can regard the device as being enabled if it knows about and
> > > > enables them all.
> > > >
> > > > -Scott
> > >
> > > Sorry for the late reply. We have been asking the silicon team for the
> > > details of the pin muxing these days.
> > > The conclusion is that all IFC interfaces(cs0/cs1/cs2) are disabled as
> > > long as QSPI is enabled on LS1043AQDS board.
> > > As I know, this muxing won't be handled in kernel. Since IFC is
> > > disabled in U-Boot, IFC node would better be disabled in kernel as
> > > well.
> > > Also in such cases, users have no other choice.
> >
> > Why should the user not have a choice to choose IFC over QSPI? Where is
> > the
> > muxing configured?
> >
> > -Scott
>
> Because this muxing can't be changed at runtime.
> Two ways so far to configure it:
> 1. SW6[1-4] switches on ls1043aqds board.
> 2. Modify QIXIS board config registers and reset the board.
These sound like runtime to me -- not compile time.
-Scott
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-31 2:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-22 10:05 [U-Boot] [PATCH] armv8/fsl-layerscape: add IFC fixup for LS1043A with QSPI enabled Gong Qianyu
2016-02-22 11:51 ` Prabhakar Kushwaha
2016-03-11 10:32 ` Qianyu Gong
2016-02-23 0:11 ` Scott Wood
2016-03-11 10:18 ` Qianyu Gong
2016-03-28 8:51 ` Prabhakar Kushwaha
2016-03-28 9:43 ` Qianyu Gong
2016-03-29 20:44 ` Scott Wood
2016-03-30 6:20 ` Qianyu Gong
2016-03-31 2:38 ` Scott Wood [this message]
2016-07-19 21:57 ` york sun
2016-07-20 6:39 ` Qianyu Gong
2016-07-20 21:25 ` york sun
2016-07-21 3:51 ` Qianyu Gong
2016-03-28 8:11 ` Qianyu Gong
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1459391936.32510.2.camel@buserror.net \
--to=oss@buserror.net \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox