From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Trimarchi Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 15:37:54 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v3] usb: omap: ulpi: fix ulpi transceiver access In-Reply-To: <51B5D51D.8030600@compulab.co.il> References: <20130606144836.GA9769@panicking> <201306092309.26265.marex@denx.de> <51B4F0E1.8010902@amarulasolutions.com> <201306092349.04523.marex@denx.de> <51B5D51D.8030600@compulab.co.il> Message-ID: <51B5D6B2.5070902@amarulasolutions.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hi On 06/10/2013 03:31 PM, Igor Grinberg wrote: > On 06/10/13 00:49, Marek Vasut wrote: >> Dear Michael Trimarchi, >> >>> Hi Marek >>> >>> On 06/09/2013 11:09 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: >>>> Dear Michael Trimarchi, >>>> >>>>> Dear Marek >>>>> >>>>> On 06/09/2013 10:05 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: >>>>>> Dear Michael Trimarchi, >>>>>> >>>>>>> This patch fix the omap access to the transceiver >>>>>>> configuration registers using the ulpi bus. As reported by >>>>>>> the documentation the bit31 is used only to check if the >>>>>>> transaction is done or still running and the reading and >>>>>>> writing operation have different offset and have different >>>>>>> values. What we need to do at the end of a transaction is >>>>>>> leave the bus in done state. Anyway an error using the ulpi >>>>>>> omap register is not recoverable so any error give out the >>>>>>> usage of this interface. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Michael Trimarchi >>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Igor Grinberg >>>>>> >>>>>> Tom, can you ACK/NAK this ? I have no omap board. >>>>> >>>>> I don't understand the point, the old code was wrong and you can >>>>> check omap3/omap4 documentation. If you revert it you still have a wrong >>>>> code so it's better to drop omap3/4 viewport. >>>>> >>>>> You can take a look at this patch >>>>> >>>>> http://git.omapzoom.org/?p=kernel/omap.git;a=commitdiff;h=2a18e1248588c3 >>>>> 26f 0a63c5bce4a611d709130a8 >>>>> >>>>> that is used to fix this errata >>>>> >>>>> http://git.omapzoom.org/?p=kernel/omap.git;a=commitdiff;h=a0dd0ee69578e3 >>>>> 2f1 469596b8fd3a6c8ef172d42 >>>>> >>>>> I'm using this ulpi code in one of our device. I have fixed the u-boot >>>>> viewport code because I have seen it wrong. Sorry for the late response >>>>> but I was busy for a Wedding ;) >>>> >>>> Fear not! I'm busy having no life, it's really hard task! I will actually >>>> be busy with that until sometimes mid-next-week. >>>> >>>>> I can try to test it tomorrow on an omap3 >>>>> device but I think that is more easy for Stefano because he has already >>>>> a platform with a recent uboot >>>> >>>> I don't care who tests it, I'd just like to make sure it's tested on more >>>> devices than one ;-) >>> >>> I think that I have already understand the problem. >>> The port_num is used starting from 0 in omap-ehci, so if this is correct my >>> patch need a fix >>> >>> from >>> >>> u32 val = (OMAP_ULPI_START | (ulpi_vp->port_num & 0xf) << 24) | >>> OMAP_ULPI_WR_OPSEL | ((u32)reg << 16) | (value & 0xff); >>> >>> to >>> >>> u32 val = (OMAP_ULPI_START | ((ulpi_vp->port_num + 1) & 0xf) << 24) | >>> OMAP_ULPI_WR_OPSEL | ((u32)reg << 16) | (value & 0xff); >>> >>> Michael >> >> Make sure you base this stuff on u-boot-usb/master too. > > I can see the v3 of this patch is already in Tom's repo and he has sent a > pull request with it. > I think currently it would be better to just do an incremental patch fixing > the port number to avoid any collisions, no? Tom? > > Ok, I will clone Tom's repo and prepare a patch Michael