From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from phobos.denx.de (phobos.denx.de [85.214.62.61]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC98ACEBF8D for ; Fri, 27 Sep 2024 09:54:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from h2850616.stratoserver.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A71589094; Fri, 27 Sep 2024 11:54:16 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sys-base.io Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Received: by phobos.denx.de (Postfix, from userid 109) id 9800A890AC; Fri, 27 Sep 2024 11:54:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from leonov.paulk.fr (leonov.paulk.fr [185.233.101.22]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3DCD78908D for ; Fri, 27 Sep 2024 11:54:12 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sys-base.io Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=paulk@sys-base.io Received: from laika.paulk.fr (12.234.24.109.rev.sfr.net [109.24.234.12]) by leonov.paulk.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 02B9C1F0004D for ; Fri, 27 Sep 2024 09:54:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by laika.paulk.fr (Postfix, from userid 65534) id 9B54AA603FF; Fri, 27 Sep 2024 09:53:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from collins (unknown [192.168.1.1]) by laika.paulk.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DD453A603F5; Fri, 27 Sep 2024 09:53:57 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2024 11:53:55 +0200 From: Paul Kocialkowski To: Quentin Schulz Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de, Simon Glass , Philipp Tomsich , Kever Yang , Jonas Karlman , Chris Morgan , Tim Lunn , Paul Kocialkowski Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] rockchip: rk3399-roc-pc: Hook sysreset gpio to enable full reset Message-ID: References: <20240926183111.1324284-1-paulk@sys-base.io> <4304848f-9af5-4991-bfc8-836ccf2abb43@cherry.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="iUlHLVSaNmgr6bRp" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4304848f-9af5-4991-bfc8-836ccf2abb43@cherry.de> X-BeenThere: u-boot@lists.denx.de X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39 Precedence: list List-Id: U-Boot discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Sender: "U-Boot" X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.103.8 at phobos.denx.de X-Virus-Status: Clean --iUlHLVSaNmgr6bRp Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Quentin, Thanks for looking into this! Le Fri 27 Sep 24, 11:25, Quentin Schulz a =C3=A9crit : > I'm not entirely sure on whose side the issue is, but I didn't receive yo= ur > mails, either from the U-Boot mailing list or directly from the Cc field.= I > however could find the patch on lore.kernel.org... and I also received yo= urs > and Dragan's exchange on patch 4 (but not the patch itself). Any chance y= ou > received something from my mail server? Does anyone in Cc of this mail > actually received the mail? No automatic reply from your mail server and the logs look good on my side, with a 250 result on all sent patches. Strange indeed... > > diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/rk3399-roc-pc-u-boot.dtsi b/arch/arm/dts/rk33= 99-roc-pc-u-boot.dtsi > > index aecf7dbe383c..883d399a06a3 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/dts/rk3399-roc-pc-u-boot.dtsi > > +++ b/arch/arm/dts/rk3399-roc-pc-u-boot.dtsi > > @@ -7,6 +7,10 @@ > > #include "rk3399-sdram-lpddr4-100.dtsi" > > / { > > + config { > > + sysreset-gpio =3D <&gpio1 RK_PA6 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; >=20 > I think this is the wrong pin to use. >=20 > The routing of GPIO1_A6 is similar on RK3399 Puma and Pine64 RockPro64, b= ut > it differs massively for the Firefly Roc PC. >=20 > However, a similar routing is done for GPIO1_A5 on the Firefly, I believe > that one is more appropriate. What do you think? I just double-checked the schematics (ROC_3399_PC), looking at signal OTP_O= UT_H which is definitely connected to GPIO1_A6 (P26). Also it clearly resets the board when toggled and solves the MMC reset issue I was having on this exact board, so I'm rather confident that it's the rig= ht one to use :) Cheers, Paul --=20 Paul Kocialkowski, Independent contractor - sys-base - https://www.sys-base.io/ Free software developer - https://www.paulk.fr/ Specialist in multimedia, graphics and embedded hardware support with Linux. --iUlHLVSaNmgr6bRp Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEAbcMXZQMtj1fphLChP3B6o/ulQwFAmb2gLMACgkQhP3B6o/u lQzKkQ//SmtYIN1s6tarrzre/BDAp+gQur5rm8kCh1tiz7q+/ziWJyRzOnVLeYOz WfqMUreWAqPIDJE739WZbPcri+cxlCrNcIZyysDbF3WhBdlX78WOLBzQS2tRL9Ra gS2rVL5WHH/hCRg+JmEgb3PXrIygtioqYb3VQoNZkNxM/jwJOhcNNTOjFMPeGXJh U6RBej8tEWaBsOaTliqMKl6fVKF7cbj4naLdpskxuElilfH1n7WGeQFZ30EVFoBG FfhRIiVuyH9jSa4k7WhKAXhnj/JO0duTxXR9Au0jI7iKDTZS+lK5pPPbEsNwZ7hc kiHbXhMV0z67uFnNPgkpVzSpGFqEjib9NyVwDQ4M1PeGu03yaVafqWonF0iLBsFn md3smP9Q6bHS/iLysCT+i97UtR70zs5apIws9i7pV5Xh0Y6EqsoqDosdKxZZ6u1k R8YmF55a2i1rJaBvWSwHJD0HvRtZPFkXGDqIerpS5SdQ9xyekVf+Jz+OqzoemX6h vSsnRmeJsPGZSXvZY7MSGX3+EJUyaqHCpMK45IYdOEAhVDSefSvhVQTvWm3JPnWk aICyNC/TzlY/o1BdbhOxJg9TfP4zMXTd7h5em3ezFo+cHl8HA54+Wo+Q5qqnmSQp Vu7B04c78WmnQNRgwZd9cLFJ4By7wxaYTTkH8t6nQi4nMD/aTDk= =ueWF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --iUlHLVSaNmgr6bRp--