* [PATCH v3 0/2] sunxi, usb: Clean up SRAM initialization code @ 2023-06-12 20:03 Sam Edwards 2023-06-12 20:03 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] usb: musb-new: sunxi: only perform SRAM initialization when necessary Sam Edwards 2023-06-12 20:03 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] usb: musb-new: sunxi: clarify the purpose of SRAM initialization Sam Edwards 0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Sam Edwards @ 2023-06-12 20:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot; +Cc: Andre Przywara, Jagan Teki, Sam Edwards Hello again, The only change from v2 is that `syscon_base` is now a param of `sunxi_musb_claim_sram`, and the TODO comment has been removed. Cheers, Sam Sam Edwards (2): usb: musb-new: sunxi: only perform SRAM initialization when necessary usb: musb-new: sunxi: clarify the purpose of SRAM initialization drivers/usb/musb-new/sunxi.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) -- 2.39.2 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v3 1/2] usb: musb-new: sunxi: only perform SRAM initialization when necessary 2023-06-12 20:03 [PATCH v3 0/2] sunxi, usb: Clean up SRAM initialization code Sam Edwards @ 2023-06-12 20:03 ` Sam Edwards 2023-06-12 20:03 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] usb: musb-new: sunxi: clarify the purpose of SRAM initialization Sam Edwards 1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Sam Edwards @ 2023-06-12 20:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot; +Cc: Andre Przywara, Jagan Teki, Sam Edwards Only the older (ca. A10, A20) sunxis need this poke for the MUSB to function. Mimic the Linux kernel and add a `has_sram` flag to the config structure that is only set for the specific compatibles that require this initialization. Signed-off-by: Sam Edwards <CFSworks@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> Tested-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> --- drivers/usb/musb-new/sunxi.c | 7 ++++++- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb-new/sunxi.c b/drivers/usb/musb-new/sunxi.c index c5c63249aa..1111a67eaf 100644 --- a/drivers/usb/musb-new/sunxi.c +++ b/drivers/usb/musb-new/sunxi.c @@ -83,6 +83,7 @@ struct sunxi_musb_config { struct musb_hdrc_config *config; + bool has_sram; }; struct sunxi_glue { @@ -311,7 +312,10 @@ static int sunxi_musb_init(struct musb *musb) musb->isr = sunxi_musb_interrupt; - USBC_ConfigFIFO_Base(); + if (glue->cfg->has_sram) { + USBC_ConfigFIFO_Base(); + } + USBC_EnableDpDmPullUp(musb->mregs); USBC_EnableIdPullUp(musb->mregs); @@ -517,6 +521,7 @@ static int musb_usb_remove(struct udevice *dev) static const struct sunxi_musb_config sun4i_a10_cfg = { .config = &musb_config, + .has_sram = true, }; static const struct sunxi_musb_config sun6i_a31_cfg = { -- 2.39.2 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v3 2/2] usb: musb-new: sunxi: clarify the purpose of SRAM initialization 2023-06-12 20:03 [PATCH v3 0/2] sunxi, usb: Clean up SRAM initialization code Sam Edwards 2023-06-12 20:03 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] usb: musb-new: sunxi: only perform SRAM initialization when necessary Sam Edwards @ 2023-06-12 20:03 ` Sam Edwards 2023-06-15 10:32 ` Andre Przywara 1 sibling, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Sam Edwards @ 2023-06-12 20:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot; +Cc: Andre Przywara, Jagan Teki, Sam Edwards This is largely a cosmetic change, with one functional distinction: We are now only setting BIT(0), and no longer clearing BIT(1). The A20 manual confirms the purpose and bitwidth of this field, and we have also been doing it this way for a while in Linux-land: The prior narrative about this initialization being about configuring a FIFO has pretty much been debunked for years now. This cleanup also adds a TODO comment about runtime discovery of the SYSCON base, per discussion with Andre. Signed-off-by: Sam Edwards <CFSworks@gmail.com> Cc: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> --- drivers/usb/musb-new/sunxi.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb-new/sunxi.c b/drivers/usb/musb-new/sunxi.c index 1111a67eaf..a8b1a8f870 100644 --- a/drivers/usb/musb-new/sunxi.c +++ b/drivers/usb/musb-new/sunxi.c @@ -171,15 +171,22 @@ static void USBC_ForceVbusValidToHigh(__iomem void *base) musb_writel(base, USBC_REG_o_ISCR, reg_val); } -static void USBC_ConfigFIFO_Base(void) -{ - u32 reg_value; +/****************************************************************************** + * Non-USBC register access needed for initialization + ******************************************************************************/ - /* config usb fifo, 8kb mode */ - reg_value = readl(SUNXI_SRAMC_BASE + 0x04); - reg_value &= ~(0x03 << 0); - reg_value |= BIT(0); - writel(reg_value, SUNXI_SRAMC_BASE + 0x04); +/* + * A10(s), A13, GR8, A20: + * switch ownership of SRAM block 'D' to the USB-OTG controller + */ +static void sunxi_musb_claim_sram(uintptr_t syscon_base) +{ + /* + * BIT(0) of SRAM_CTRL_REG1 (syscon+0x04) controls SRAM-D ownership: + * '0' -> exclusive access by CPU + * '1' -> exclusive access by USB0 + */ + setbits_le32(syscon_base + 0x04, BIT(0)); } /****************************************************************************** @@ -313,7 +320,13 @@ static int sunxi_musb_init(struct musb *musb) musb->isr = sunxi_musb_interrupt; if (glue->cfg->has_sram) { - USBC_ConfigFIFO_Base(); + /* + * This is an older USB-OTG controller that Allwinner did not + * endow with a dedicated SRAM block; it instead uses SRAM + * block 'D', ownership of which needs to be handed over by + * the CPU + */ + sunxi_musb_claim_sram(SUNXI_SRAMC_BASE); } USBC_EnableDpDmPullUp(musb->mregs); -- 2.39.2 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] usb: musb-new: sunxi: clarify the purpose of SRAM initialization 2023-06-12 20:03 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] usb: musb-new: sunxi: clarify the purpose of SRAM initialization Sam Edwards @ 2023-06-15 10:32 ` Andre Przywara 0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Andre Przywara @ 2023-06-15 10:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sam Edwards; +Cc: u-boot, Jagan Teki, Marek Vasut On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 14:03:02 -0600 Sam Edwards <cfsworks@gmail.com> wrote: > This is largely a cosmetic change, with one functional distinction: > We are now only setting BIT(0), and no longer clearing BIT(1). > > The A20 manual confirms the purpose and bitwidth of this field, and we > have also been doing it this way for a while in Linux-land: The prior > narrative about this initialization being about configuring a FIFO has > pretty much been debunked for years now. > > This cleanup also adds a TODO comment about runtime discovery > of the SYSCON base, per discussion with Andre. > > Signed-off-by: Sam Edwards <CFSworks@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> Thanks for the changes! Cheers, Andre > Cc: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> > --- > drivers/usb/musb-new/sunxi.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb-new/sunxi.c b/drivers/usb/musb-new/sunxi.c > index 1111a67eaf..a8b1a8f870 100644 > --- a/drivers/usb/musb-new/sunxi.c > +++ b/drivers/usb/musb-new/sunxi.c > @@ -171,15 +171,22 @@ static void USBC_ForceVbusValidToHigh(__iomem void *base) > musb_writel(base, USBC_REG_o_ISCR, reg_val); > } > > -static void USBC_ConfigFIFO_Base(void) > -{ > - u32 reg_value; > +/****************************************************************************** > + * Non-USBC register access needed for initialization > + ******************************************************************************/ > > - /* config usb fifo, 8kb mode */ > - reg_value = readl(SUNXI_SRAMC_BASE + 0x04); > - reg_value &= ~(0x03 << 0); > - reg_value |= BIT(0); > - writel(reg_value, SUNXI_SRAMC_BASE + 0x04); > +/* > + * A10(s), A13, GR8, A20: > + * switch ownership of SRAM block 'D' to the USB-OTG controller > + */ > +static void sunxi_musb_claim_sram(uintptr_t syscon_base) > +{ > + /* > + * BIT(0) of SRAM_CTRL_REG1 (syscon+0x04) controls SRAM-D ownership: > + * '0' -> exclusive access by CPU > + * '1' -> exclusive access by USB0 > + */ > + setbits_le32(syscon_base + 0x04, BIT(0)); > } > > /****************************************************************************** > @@ -313,7 +320,13 @@ static int sunxi_musb_init(struct musb *musb) > musb->isr = sunxi_musb_interrupt; > > if (glue->cfg->has_sram) { > - USBC_ConfigFIFO_Base(); > + /* > + * This is an older USB-OTG controller that Allwinner did not > + * endow with a dedicated SRAM block; it instead uses SRAM > + * block 'D', ownership of which needs to be handed over by > + * the CPU > + */ > + sunxi_musb_claim_sram(SUNXI_SRAMC_BASE); > } > > USBC_EnableDpDmPullUp(musb->mregs); ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-06-15 10:33 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2023-06-12 20:03 [PATCH v3 0/2] sunxi, usb: Clean up SRAM initialization code Sam Edwards 2023-06-12 20:03 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] usb: musb-new: sunxi: only perform SRAM initialization when necessary Sam Edwards 2023-06-12 20:03 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] usb: musb-new: sunxi: clarify the purpose of SRAM initialization Sam Edwards 2023-06-15 10:32 ` Andre Przywara
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox