From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lokesh Vutla Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 17:16:21 +0530 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/6] arm: am57xx: cl-som-am57x: fix XHCI registers base address In-Reply-To: <20170212154748.GQ26129@bill-the-cat> References: <1486623626-16061-1-git-send-email-uri.mashiach@compulab.co.il> <20170209202952.GI26129@bill-the-cat> <80f3027a-c19a-3c23-e300-d72590fecbdf@compulab.co.il> <20170212154748.GQ26129@bill-the-cat> Message-ID: List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Sunday 12 February 2017 09:17 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 10:55:27AM +0200, Uri Mashiach wrote: >> Hi Tom, >> >> On 02/09/2017 10:29 PM, Tom Rini wrote: >>> On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 09:00:26AM +0200, Uri Mashiach wrote: >>> >>>> The following XHCI registers base address are set to OMAP5 values: >>>> OMAP_XHCI_BASE, OMAP_OCP1_SCP_BASE, OMAP_OTG_WRAPPER_BASE >>>> >>>> Captured crash for "usb start" command: >>>> ----------------------------------cut---------------------------------- >>>> => usb start >>>> starting USB... >>>> USB0: data abort >>>> pc : [] lr : [] >>>> reloc pc : [<8081cd22>] lr : [<8081cb63>] >>>> sp : fdf42d08 ip : fff9e040 fp : fdf42d50 >>>> r10: fff8a998 r9 : fdf42ef0 r8 : 00000000 >>>> r7 : fdf42d28 r6 : fdf42d2c r5 : fffa5c00 r4 : 00000000 >>>> r3 : 4a020000 r2 : 00000000 r1 : fdf42e78 r0 : fffa5c00 >>>> Flags: nzCv IRQs off FIQs off Mode SVC_32 >>>> Resetting CPU ... >>>> >>>> resetting ... >>>> ----------------------------------cut---------------------------------- >>>> >>>> Fix by adding the CL-SOM-AM57x target to the XHCI registers base address >>>> ifdef'ery. >>>> A better fix should be based on a SOC family defines (currently >>>> missing). >>> >>> Can you please go add the Kconfig symbols that would be the better >>> solution please? Thanks! >> >> The SOC family symbol CONFIG_AM57XX was removed by the commit >> 3891a54: "ARM: DRA7x/AM57xx: Get rid of CONFIG_AM57XX". >> Maybe the symbol should be reintroduced just for the XHCI registers >> section? > > Yes, sounds like we do have a case where DRA7xx is not the same as > AM57xx then? > No that's not right. It is just DRA74x_EVM and AM57XX evm is using different instances of XHCI. Ideally this base address should be coming from DT. I don't think it is a good idea to introduce CONFIG_AM57XX. Thanks and regards, Lokesh