From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Eric Nelson <eric.nelson@boundarydevices.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2013 07:21:28 -0700
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx6: Add IOMUX_CONFIG_SION flag to all GPIO
 pins
In-Reply-To: <CAP9ODKodMnb5nHEoYaNKUTFLFe2rZAf=jDYSJO++bkrwP3EsNg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1380492900-910-1-git-send-email-otavio@ossystems.com.br>	<524A88F2.9000903@denx.de>	<CAP9ODKrW3g0yjT8SUH-P+TmrJWHesenAid-rM3mPcrHv27b0Ew@mail.gmail.com>	<201310011443.22955.marex@denx.de>
	<CAP9ODKodMnb5nHEoYaNKUTFLFe2rZAf=jDYSJO++bkrwP3EsNg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <524ADA68.3090707@boundarydevices.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

On 10/01/2013 06:08 AM, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:
>> Dear Otavio Salvador,
>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 5:33 AM, Stefano Babic <sbabic@denx.de> wrote:
>>>> Hi Otavio,
>>>>
>>>> On 30/09/2013 00:15, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>>>>> The IOMUX_CONFIG_SION allows for reading PAD value from PSR register.
>>>>>
>>>>> The following quote from the datasheet:
>>>>>
>>>>> ,----
>>>>>
>>>>> | ...
>>>>> | 28.4.2.2 GPIO Write Mode
>>>>> | The programming sequence for driving output signals should be as
>>>>> | follows: 1. Configure IOMUX to select GPIO mode (Via IOMUXC), also
>>>>> | enable SION if need to read loopback pad value through PSR
>>>>> | 2. Configure GPIO direction register to output (GPIO_GDIR[GDIR] set to
>>>>> | 1b). 3. Write value to data register (GPIO_DR).
>>>>> | ...
>>>>>
>>>>> `----
>>>>>
>>>>> This fixes the gpio_get_value to properly work when a GPIO is set for
>>>>> output and has no conflicts.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for Beno?t Th?baudeau <benoit.thebaudeau@advansee.com>, Fabio
>>>>> Estevam <fabio.estevam@freescale.com> and Eric B?nard
>>>>> <eric@eukrea.com> for helping to properly trace this down.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br>
>>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> I come later in the discussion, but I see you all have found the
>>>> solution ;-).
>>>>
>>>> I suggest you add in the commit message that this patch is only for
>>>> i.MX6 (if you do not plan to extend it to the other i.MXes...), so that
>>>> we can track that the same must be done also for the other SOCs.
>>>
>>> I think this is clear from the commit prefix.
>>
>> The commit message should be ARM: mx6: or such btw.
>>
>> It'd be nice to fix it up for MX5 as well so we're consistent.
>
> Benoit expressed some doubt if it can be assumed to behave the same
> for all i.MX that's why I didn't apply it for all. I cannot look at
> this, at this moment, so I prefer to not change it without checking
> the datasheet for it.
>

The same behaviour is present on i.MX51 and i.MX53.