On 08/26/2016 12:57 PM, Sriram Dash wrote: >> From: Marek Vasut [mailto:ma...@denx.de] >> On 08/26/2016 12:31 PM, Sriram Dash wrote: >>>> From: Marek Vasut [mailto:ma...@denx.de] On 08/25/2016 08:47 AM, >>>> Sriram Dash wrote: >>>>>> From: Marek Vasut [mailto:ma...@denx.de] On 08/24/2016 12:39 PM, >>>>>> Sriram Dash wrote: >>>>>>> Currently the controller by default enables the Receive Detect >>>>>>> feature in P3 mode in USB 3.0 PHY. However, USB 3.0 PHY does not >>>>>>> reliably support receive detection in P3 mode. >>>>>>> Enabling the USB3 controller to configure USB in P2 mode whenever >>>>>>> the Receive Detect feature is required. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sriram Dash <sriram.d...@nxp.com> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Rajesh Bhagat <rajesh.bha...@nxp.com> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> Changes in v2: >>>>>>> - Do Soc ver checking for applying erratum >>>>>>> >>>>>>> drivers/usb/common/fsl-errata.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>>> drivers/usb/host/xhci-dwc3.c | 5 +++++ >>>>>>> drivers/usb/host/xhci-fsl.c | 8 ++++++++ >>>>>>> include/fsl_usb.h | 1 + >>>>>>> include/linux/usb/dwc3.h | 2 ++ >>>>>>> 5 files changed, 42 insertions(+) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/common/fsl-errata.c >>>>>>> b/drivers/usb/common/fsl-errata.c index 183bf2b..f2bffba 100644 >>>>>>> --- a/drivers/usb/common/fsl-errata.c >>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/usb/common/fsl-errata.c >>>>>>> @@ -190,4 +190,30 @@ bool has_erratum_a008751(void) >>>>>>> return false; >>>>>>> } >>>>>>> >>>>>>> +bool has_erratum_a010151(void) >>>>>>> +{ >>>>>>> + u32 svr = get_svr(); >>>>>>> + u32 soc = SVR_SOC_VER(svr); >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> + switch (soc) { >>>>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM64 >>>>>>> + case SVR_LS2080A: >>>>>>> + case SVR_LS2085A: >>>>>>> + case SVR_LS1046A: >>>>>>> + case SVR_LS1012A: >>>>>>> + return IS_SVR_REV(svr, 1, 0); >>>>>>> + case SVR_LS1043A: >>>>>>> + return IS_SVR_REV(svr, 1, 0) || IS_SVR_REV(svr, 1, 1); >>>>>>> #endif >>>>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_LS102XA >>>>>>> + case SOC_VER_LS1020: >>>>>>> + case SOC_VER_LS1021: >>>>>>> + case SOC_VER_LS1022: >>>>>>> + case SOC_VER_SLS1020: >>>>>>> + return IS_SVR_REV(svr, 2, 0); >>>>>>> +#endif >>>>>>> + } >>>>>> >>>>>> Is the ifdef really needed ? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yes. The SVR (SVR_LS2080A, SOC_VER_LS1020) are defined in different >>>>> ARCH specific files. So, we have used the ifdefs. >>>> >>>> Or you can just include all of the headers and then you don't need the >>>> ifdef, no ? >>>> >>> >>> The headers for the respective ARCHs are included in fsl_errata.h >>> file. But, there are some macros/structs/variables which are common >>> across the ARCHs, for example: DCFG_DCSR_PORCR1, RCW_SB_EN_REG_INDEX, >>> sys_info, etc. So, they are also kept inside the ifdefs. >> >> I don't understand your argument. What happens if you remove the ifdefs? >> > > The fsl_errata.h file includes the headers asm/processor.h(for PPC), > asm/arch-ls102xa/immap_ls102xa.h( for LS1), asm/arch/soc.h(for Layerscape). > As some macros/structs are common across the ARCH, if we remove the ifdefs, > we may
may or will ? > experience compilation error on redefinition of the macros and structs. And these are not easy to fix ? > So, the ifdefs are necessary. > >> -- >> Best regards, >> Marek Vasut -- Best regards, Marek Vasut _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
