Dear Kuo-Jung Su, [...]
> >> --- a/common/usb_hub.c > >> +++ b/common/usb_hub.c > >> @@ -419,6 +419,14 @@ static int usb_hub_configure(struct usb_device > >> *dev) > >> > >> portstatus = le16_to_cpu(portsts->wPortStatus); > >> portchange = le16_to_cpu(portsts->wPortChange); > >> > >> +#ifdef CONFIG_USB_EHCI_FARADAY > >> + /* Faraday EHCI needs a long long delay here */ > >> + if (!portchange && !portstatus) { > >> + if (get_timer(start) < 250) > >> + continue; > >> + } > >> +#endif > > > > I'd say just call a weak function here, in case some other non-EHCI > > compliant controller happened to need this too. btw. does it need to be > > 250 ms or can you poll for readiness somehow ? > > Got it, thanks. I'll add a weak function later, > and about the 250 ms is actually an estimated value. > The delay time is actually board specific, it looks to me > that it's somehow related to the number of usb host controllers > and the attached usb flash drivers. > > For example: > > 1. A369 - FUSBH200: a usb flash driver attached > A369 - FOTG210: nothing attached > => no extra delay required. > > 2. A369 - FUSBH200: nothing attached > A369 - FOTG210: a usb flash driver attached > => no extra delay required. > > 3. A369 - FUSBH200: a usb flash driver attached > A369 - FOTG210: a usb flash driver attached > => The 2nd ehci host requires 200 ms extra delay to detect the attached > device. So I put a 250ms here for safe. Urgh, isn't it a PHY problem then? Or can this not be solved like board/genesi/mx51_efikamx/efikamx-usb.c board_ehci_hcd_postinit() or such function? [...] Best regards, Marek Vasut _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot