On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 09:16:45AM -0700, Tom Warren wrote: > Tom, > > > On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Tom Rini <tr...@ti.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 09:21:18AM -0700, Tom Warren wrote: > > > > > Marek, > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Marek Vasut [mailto:ma...@denx.de] > > > > Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 4:47 PM > > > > To: Jim Lin > > > > Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de; Tom Warren; Stephen Warren > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] ARM: Tegra: USB: Add driver support for > > > > Tegra30/Tegra114 > > > > > > > > Dear Jim Lin, > > > > > > > > > Tegra30 and Tegra114 are compatible except 1. T30 takes 55 ms to > > > > > finish Port Reset. T114 takes > > > > > 50 ms. > > > > > 2. PLL parameters > > > > > > > > > > Tested on Tegra20 Harmony/Seaboard, Tegra30 Cardhu, and Tegra114 > > > > > Dalmore platforms. All works well. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jim Lin <ji...@nvidia.com> > > > > > --- > > > > > arch/arm/include/asm/arch-tegra/clk_rst.h | 10 + > > > > > arch/arm/include/asm/arch-tegra/usb.h | 249 ------------------ > > > > > arch/arm/include/asm/arch-tegra114/tegra.h | 1 + > > > > > arch/arm/include/asm/arch-tegra114/usb.h | 287 > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > arch/arm/include/asm/arch-tegra20/usb.h | 279 > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > arch/arm/include/asm/arch-tegra30/usb.h | 294 > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > > > > Do we now have three copies of the same stuff ? > > > > > > When only T20 was supported (for USB), there was a common > > > (arch-tegra/usb.h) header. That's been moved to arch-tegra20/usb.h, > > > and (unfortunately) there are 2 new usb.h files due to the HW > > > differences in the registers between T20 and T30/T114. I don't see > > > any easy way to have a common usb.h file for Tegra w/o adding ugly > > > #ifdefs to the USB register space struct(s). > > > > Just how different are they? Are all of the related defines and masks > > different too? Do we have conflicts? Moved registers? Just conflicting > > values? A quick peek shows '30' and '114' are pretty similar, except > > for masks. Maybe splitting the struct up so you can discard some of the > > reserved gaps, run-time checking to see if we can or cannot use a > > particular part of the struct? > > > > This is really Jim's patchset (and his specialty), but here's what I know > about Tegra USB regs: > > T20 had a gap in the registers @ offset 0x130. T30 (and T114) moved the > offset of the command/status/interrupt regs down to fill in this gap, which > dragged all the subsequent registers back 16 bytes. The two SoCs 'families' > sync up again at offset 0x400 and are pretty much equal from there on out > to 0x840. > > The defines are probably 90% the same, with some weirdness for the first > USB controller (USB1) and its PTS/STS bits that differs in offset from the > other 2 controllers (again, no clue why the HW guys would do this). > > So we could have the 3 different USB headers in the arch-tegraXX area > contain the register structs, and have a common arch-tegra/usb.h that has > the #defines that are the same, and is included in the arch-tegraxx/usb.h > files. That would reduce this down somewhat, without the ugliness of > #ifdefs in the structs. > > What do you think?
Sounds like the best we can do then. It's probable that trying to define USB_REGMAP_GAPSIZE1/2 or whatever to do it on the fly would just be uglier still. Thanks! -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
