[U-Boot-Users] Re: Request to try-out 2.6.4 rmk patch

[U-Boot-Users] Re: Request to try-out 2.6.4 rmk patch

[himbA]

Marc Singer wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 01:42:43PM +0100, Wouter van Heyst wrote:
> 
>>On Sat, Mar 20, 2004 at 08:00:18AM -0800, Marc Singer wrote:
>>
>><snip>
>>

you are talking about smc91111 driver in rmk pxa tree (smc91x), right?

If so I have been trying to figure that one out for quite some time now 
- being a newbie at the whole thing doesn't make it easier either...

My pxa setup with smsc 911c11 runs fine at boot up and while my board is 
requesting info about nfs mounted root fs from the host. Every packet is 
successfuly handled until the big ones kick in. I'm talking about first 
4k chunk of busybox. From here on there are several retries to resend 
the request packet (with the reply from host being recieved) with no 
luck and eventualy kernel oops. The thing is when the chip gets flooded 
with data weird things happen and retry packets don't even get out on 
the wire.
On some other topic I saw a note about ARDY signal not being handled 
properly in CPLD and thats what I will investigate with our constructors 
further. I belive driver works, bacause enabling debug msgs from kernel 
renders connection usefull (for the price of annoying msgs on console) 
but there could be some more tuning done.

So could it be that kernel is running 'too fast' eg. is accessing smsc 
registers before it should (device not ready) ? Could this behaviour be 
caused by inproper ARDY handling ? Our ARDY from LAN chip drives pxa RDY 
signal, but after reading cpld vhdl description it seem that our RDY 
signal is set all the time - Could this be the answer for early register 
access and data corruption ?

rgrds, himba

-- 
..because under Linux "if something is possible in principle,
then it is already implemented or somebody is working on it".
							--LKI

[U-Boot-Users] Re: Request to try-out 2.6.4 rmk patch

[himbA]

grin.... wrong mailling list

please ignore

> you are talking about smc91111 driver in rmk pxa tree (smc91x), right?
> 
> If so I have been trying to figure that one out for quite some time now 
> - being a newbie at the whole thing doesn't make it easier either...

-- 
..because under Linux "if something is possible in principle,
then it is already implemented or somebody is working on it".
							--LKI