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 C34ABCEBF62 for ; Fri, 27 Sep 2024 12:25:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from h2850616.stratoserver.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9B6E890BB; Fri, 27 Sep 2024 14:25:57 +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 39EB2890BE; Fri, 27 Sep 2024 14:25:57 +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 CD45C88F85 for ; Fri, 27 Sep 2024 14:25:54 +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 8CD741F0004F for ; Fri, 27 Sep 2024 12:25:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: by laika.paulk.fr (Postfix, from userid 65534) id C219AA604A9; Fri, 27 Sep 2024 12:25:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from collins (unknown [192.168.1.1]) by laika.paulk.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9F98DA604A2; Fri, 27 Sep 2024 12:25:47 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2024 14:25:45 +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="sep3G3zQ+LPyVaTo" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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 --sep3G3zQ+LPyVaTo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Le Fri 27 Sep 24, 12:07, Quentin Schulz a =C3=A9crit : > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/rk3399-roc-pc-u-boot.dtsi b/arch/arm/dts/= rk3399-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 RockPro6= 4, but > > > it differs massively for the Firefly Roc PC. > > >=20 > > > However, a similar routing is done for GPIO1_A5 on the Firefly, I bel= ieve > > > that one is more appropriate. What do you think? > >=20 > > I just double-checked the schematics (ROC_3399_PC), looking at signal O= TP_OUT_H > > which is definitely connected to GPIO1_A6 (P26). > >=20 > > 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= right > > one to use :) >=20 > At least we're on the same page for using OTP_OUT_H, but it's routed to > GPIO1_A5 on the schematics I found: >=20 > https://www.t-firefly.com/download/Firefly-RK3399/hardware/Firefly-RK3399= _V10/Firefly-RK3399_V10_SCH_(2017-2-8).pdf >=20 > Mmmmmm seems like I was looking at the wrong schematics? Ah yes I think the Firefly-RK3399 and ROC-RK3399-PC are two distinct design= s. > https://en.t-firefly.com/doc/download/page/id/51.html does route GPIO1_A6= to > the OTP_OUT_H signal.. > https://en.t-firefly.com/doc/download/page/id/78.html > https://en.t-firefly.com/doc/download/page/id/127.html >=20 > So, the Roc PC, Roc PC Plus and Roc PC Pro all seem to have a similar > routing for this pin, therefore: >=20 > Reviewed-by: Quentin Schulz Right, and for the record the version I have is the ROC-RK3399-PC Plus. Thanks! --=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. --sep3G3zQ+LPyVaTo Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEAbcMXZQMtj1fphLChP3B6o/ulQwFAmb2pEkACgkQhP3B6o/u lQzuWA/7BXiPhvDJyVMcyQG5Zn0b4HC9o0O71QlJUAyqg40mFVRnwv3U62heFKPW lpzn4oCas0HTZV1efEohdZoImfrVwXdM4lstsCwEnpL9E9UJ6RljQXMbOiaBF1Fv qPFk6i5m7Fedwq2WJJI6KgzZ+p4r3lXVT8Rk0nHJ7wNgHs++BzbcaOcg334sprSQ PyfhSM+c3jFHxTY61//jz+tfa8zNOe+hA+YMFQwxSIwcJKPyhqnpwKx0Bx0uDS6e bnf3rmexTj6EeKiFqRl9ql4Yejms1wx9Qq5qf8aJ01wj/nJQ//Xy4cSY/28rBSUy wgGYgfwQX5ZcCxXmaqgoIXw+3qcjYSsUl+quR+U0H40lPFaL/hiDfZF5EtyrnwBX ykiH5TPd4WrQmHE27zwjzTo2GUl9nPsvcnlR1ebrRMgqzo/6TOC6GkE+fmNmawIx w1PsMHfQIyOXOppkp7jZFdrrf62P76qdTf59S8EkzvTIhDnIb+P/smZieeDFn1pM i1dHBRa/5HE1jufAQf/rxdEJa44bY4t0Eb8+UX8QIGAUUaKDvaBATK3NvDPQ7wLC EB0rXK6AT4Xkk86vlKrOPn9ntp31ti3/+aPYKvQCYXB6z3F2hoZOqKC6ha8TcLYe Gg49vu9JBFcgjaen1SgaPQ8sZaP8ZG5Qq/7lSVfNqSXj0XtGL98= =A5fK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --sep3G3zQ+LPyVaTo--