[U-Boot] mx6: consolidating and extending anadig/analog/anatop register defs

[U-Boot] mx6: consolidating and extending anadig/analog/anatop register defs

[Wolfgang Grandegger]

Hello,

for the USB support on MX6Q, I'm trying to consolidate and extend the
register definitions for the ANADIG registers. Unfortunately, three
different names are used for the same registers: ANADIG, analog and
ANATOP. Any idea what the names do stand for and what would be the most
appropriate one. Apart from that, we should have a separate structure
and header file for these registers. Currently, they are added to the
CCM regs.

Wolfgang.

[U-Boot] mx6: consolidating and extending anadig/analog/anatop register defs

[Marek Vasut]

> Hello,
> 
> for the USB support on MX6Q, I'm trying to consolidate and extend the
> register definitions for the ANADIG registers. Unfortunately, three
> different names are used for the same registers: ANADIG, analog and
> ANATOP. Any idea what the names do stand for and what would be the most
> appropriate one. Apart from that, we should have a separate structure
> and header file for these registers. Currently, they are added to the
> CCM regs.

DIGCTL? ;-) That's how they call those on MX28 I believe.

M

[U-Boot] mx6: consolidating and extending anadig/analog/anatop register defs

[Liu Hui-R64343]

Hi, Wolfgang,

>-----Original Message-----
From: u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de [mailto:u-boot-bounces at lists.denx.de]
>On Behalf Of Wolfgang Grandegger
>Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 8:08 PM
>To: U-Boot
>Subject: [U-Boot] mx6: consolidating and extending anadig/analog/anatop
>register defs
>
>Hello,
>
>for the USB support on MX6Q, I'm trying to consolidate and extend the
>register definitions for the ANADIG registers. Unfortunately, three different
>names are used for the same registers: ANADIG, analog and ANATOP. Any
>idea what the names do stand for and what would be the most appropriate
>one. Apart from that, we should have a separate structure and header file for
>these registers. Currently, they are added to the CCM regs.

The register definition in the CCM according to the RM as followings:
Addresses: CCM_analog_PLL_SYS is 0h base + 0h offset = 0000_0000h
CCM_analog_PLL_SYS_SET is 0h base + 4h offset = 0000_0004h
CCM_analog_PLL_SYS_CLR is 0h base + 8h offset = 0000_0008h
CCM_analog_PLL_SYS_TOG is 0h base + Ch offset = 0000_000Ch

Thus, I put the register definition into the CCM parts.

>
>Wolfgang.
>
>_______________________________________________
>U-Boot mailing list
>U-Boot at lists.denx.de
>http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

[U-Boot] mx6: consolidating and extending anadig/analog/anatop register defs

[Marek Vasut]

> Hi, Wolfgang,
> 
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: u-boot-bounces at lists.denx.de [mailto:u-boot-bounces at lists.denx.de]
> >On Behalf Of Wolfgang Grandegger
> >Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 8:08 PM
> >To: U-Boot
> >Subject: [U-Boot] mx6: consolidating and extending anadig/analog/anatop
> >register defs
> >
> >Hello,
> >
> >for the USB support on MX6Q, I'm trying to consolidate and extend the
> >register definitions for the ANADIG registers. Unfortunately, three
> >different names are used for the same registers: ANADIG, analog and
> >ANATOP. Any idea what the names do stand for and what would be the most
> >appropriate one. Apart from that, we should have a separate structure and
> >header file for these registers. Currently, they are added to the CCM
> >regs.
> 
> The register definition in the CCM according to the RM as followings:
> Addresses: CCM_analog_PLL_SYS is 0h base + 0h offset = 0000_0000h
> CCM_analog_PLL_SYS_SET is 0h base + 4h offset = 0000_0004h
> CCM_analog_PLL_SYS_CLR is 0h base + 8h offset = 0000_0008h
> CCM_analog_PLL_SYS_TOG is 0h base + Ch offset = 0000_000Ch
> 
> Thus, I put the register definition into the CCM parts.

This again resembles MX28 ... damn, can't we share some parts of MX28 for MX6Q ?

Fabio, I think I'll need one too, this is getting weird ;-)

M

[U-Boot] mx6: consolidating and extending anadig/analog/anatop register defs

[Wolfgang Grandegger]

Hi Marek,

On 02/14/2012 01:37 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> Hi, Wolfgang,
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: u-boot-bounces at lists.denx.de [mailto:u-boot-bounces at lists.denx.de]
>>> On Behalf Of Wolfgang Grandegger
>>> Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 8:08 PM
>>> To: U-Boot
>>> Subject: [U-Boot] mx6: consolidating and extending anadig/analog/anatop
>>> register defs
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> for the USB support on MX6Q, I'm trying to consolidate and extend the
>>> register definitions for the ANADIG registers. Unfortunately, three
>>> different names are used for the same registers: ANADIG, analog and
>>> ANATOP. Any idea what the names do stand for and what would be the most
>>> appropriate one. Apart from that, we should have a separate structure and
>>> header file for these registers. Currently, they are added to the CCM
>>> regs.
>>
>> The register definition in the CCM according to the RM as followings:
>> Addresses: CCM_analog_PLL_SYS is 0h base + 0h offset = 0000_0000h
>> CCM_analog_PLL_SYS_SET is 0h base + 4h offset = 0000_0004h
>> CCM_analog_PLL_SYS_CLR is 0h base + 8h offset = 0000_0008h
>> CCM_analog_PLL_SYS_TOG is 0h base + Ch offset = 0000_000Ch
>>
>> Thus, I put the register definition into the CCM parts.
> 
> This again resembles MX28 ... damn, can't we share some parts of MX28 for MX6Q ?
> 
> Fabio, I think I'll need one too, this is getting weird ;-)

Unfortunately, I did not get hold of a RM yet :(. It's still under NDA,
I believe. Therefore I will postpone my "consolidation" activities for
the time being. The USB support patch I sent does work, as Dirk
confirmed, and therefore I suggest to apply it as intermediate solution.

Wolfgang.

[U-Boot] mx6: consolidating and extending anadig/analog/anatop register defs

[Marek Vasut]

> Hi Marek,
> 
> On 02/14/2012 01:37 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > Hi, Wolfgang,
> > > 
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: u-boot-bounces at lists.denx.de
> > > > [mailto:u-boot-bounces at lists.denx.de] On Behalf Of Wolfgang
> > > > Grandegger Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 8:08 PM
> > > > To: U-Boot
> > > > Subject: [U-Boot] mx6: consolidating and extending
> > > > anadig/analog/anatop register defs
> > > > 
> > > > Hello,
> > > > 
> > > > for the USB support on MX6Q, I'm trying to consolidate and extend
> > > > the register definitions for the ANADIG registers. Unfortunately,
> > > > three different names are used for the same registers: ANADIG,
> > > > analog and ANATOP. Any idea what the names do stand for and what
> > > > would be the most appropriate one. Apart from that, we should have
> > > > a separate structure and header file for these registers.
> > > > Currently, they are added to the CCM regs.
> > > 
> > > The register definition in the CCM according to the RM as followings:
> > > Addresses: CCM_analog_PLL_SYS is 0h base + 0h offset = 0000_0000h
> > > CCM_analog_PLL_SYS_SET is 0h base + 4h offset = 0000_0004h
> > > CCM_analog_PLL_SYS_CLR is 0h base + 8h offset = 0000_0008h
> > > CCM_analog_PLL_SYS_TOG is 0h base + Ch offset = 0000_000Ch
> > > 
> > > Thus, I put the register definition into the CCM parts.
> > 
> > This again resembles MX28 ... damn, can't we share some parts of MX28
> > for MX6Q ?
> > 
> > Fabio, I think I'll need one too, this is getting weird ;-)
> 
> Unfortunately, I did not get hold of a RM yet :(.

RM? Who's that?

 It's still under NDA,
> I believe. Therefore I will postpone my "consolidation" activities for
> the time being.

Sorry, I don't intent to hinder your efforts, I'm just seeing a pattern :)

The USB support patch I sent does work, as Dirk
> confirmed, and therefore I suggest to apply it as intermediate solution.

Well ... All right then. Though my sense for perfect solution is hurting a lot ;-)
> 
> Wolfgang.

[U-Boot] mx6: consolidating and extending anadig/analog/anatop register defs

[Wolfgang Grandegger]

On 02/14/2012 02:07 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> Hi Marek,
>>
>> On 02/14/2012 01:37 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>> Hi, Wolfgang,
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: u-boot-bounces at lists.denx.de
>>>>> [mailto:u-boot-bounces at lists.denx.de] On Behalf Of Wolfgang
>>>>> Grandegger Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 8:08 PM
>>>>> To: U-Boot
>>>>> Subject: [U-Boot] mx6: consolidating and extending
>>>>> anadig/analog/anatop register defs
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> for the USB support on MX6Q, I'm trying to consolidate and extend
>>>>> the register definitions for the ANADIG registers. Unfortunately,
>>>>> three different names are used for the same registers: ANADIG,
>>>>> analog and ANATOP. Any idea what the names do stand for and what
>>>>> would be the most appropriate one. Apart from that, we should have
>>>>> a separate structure and header file for these registers.
>>>>> Currently, they are added to the CCM regs.
>>>>
>>>> The register definition in the CCM according to the RM as followings:
>>>> Addresses: CCM_analog_PLL_SYS is 0h base + 0h offset = 0000_0000h
>>>> CCM_analog_PLL_SYS_SET is 0h base + 4h offset = 0000_0004h
>>>> CCM_analog_PLL_SYS_CLR is 0h base + 8h offset = 0000_0008h
>>>> CCM_analog_PLL_SYS_TOG is 0h base + Ch offset = 0000_000Ch
>>>>
>>>> Thus, I put the register definition into the CCM parts.
>>>
>>> This again resembles MX28 ... damn, can't we share some parts of MX28
>>> for MX6Q ?
>>>
>>> Fabio, I think I'll need one too, this is getting weird ;-)
>>
>> Unfortunately, I did not get hold of a RM yet :(.
> 
> RM? Who's that?

Reference Manual!

>  It's still under NDA,
>> I believe. Therefore I will postpone my "consolidation" activities for
>> the time being.
> 
> Sorry, I don't intent to hinder your efforts, I'm just seeing a pattern :)
> 
> The USB support patch I sent does work, as Dirk
>> confirmed, and therefore I suggest to apply it as intermediate solution.
> 
> Well ... All right then. Though my sense for perfect solution is hurting a lot ;-)

Well, that's OK and I realized some kind of mess as well, which should
be fixed sooner than later.

Wolfgang.

[U-Boot] mx6: consolidating and extending anadig/analog/anatop register defs

[Stefano Babic]

On 14/02/2012 14:01, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:

> Unfortunately, I did not get hold of a RM yet :(. It's still under NDA,
> I believe. Therefore I will postpone my "consolidation" activities for
> the time being. The USB support patch I sent does work, as Dirk
> confirmed, and therefore I suggest to apply it as intermediate solution.

Ok, nice. I will apply your patches to u-boot-imx.

Stefano

-- 
=====================================================================
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80  Email: office at denx.de
=====================================================================