Hi Stefan, On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 8:27 PM, Bin Meng <bmeng...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Stefan, > > On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 7:28 PM, Stefan Roese <s...@denx.de> wrote: >> Hi Bin, >> >> >> On 27.06.2017 10:27, Bin Meng wrote: >>> >>> Hi Stefan, >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 1:23 PM, Stefan Roese <s...@denx.de> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Bin, >>>> >>>> >>>> On 27.06.2017 02:01, Bin Meng wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 2:07 AM, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 06/24/2017 03:57 AM, Bin Meng wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Marek, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 2:02 AM, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 06/23/2017 11:54 AM, Bin Meng wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> xHCI spec says: the values of the 'route string' field shall be >>>>>>>>> initialized by the first 'Address Device' command issued to a >>>>>>>>> device slot, and shall not be modified by any other command. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So far U-Boot does not program this field, and it does not prevent >>>>>>>>> SS device directly attached to root port, or HS device behind an HS >>>>>>>>> hub, from working, due to the fact that 'route string' is used by >>>>>>>>> the xHC to target SS packets. But in order to enumerate devices >>>>>>>>> behind an SS hub, this field must be programmed. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> With this commit and along with previous commits, now SS & HS >>>>>>>>> devices >>>>>>>>> attached to a USB 3.0 hub can be enumerated by U-Boot. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> As usual, this new feature is only available when DM is on. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Great, but I really dislike the ifdef pollution, so this needs to be >>>>>>>> sorted out. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The ifdef was needed due to it calls DM APIs or access DM udevice. I >>>>>>> have no intention to add a new feature to the non-DM driver. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> But then this creates a massive disparity, it's like we're growing two >>>>>> USB stacks. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yep, unfortunately. But if we continue adding new features/fixes to >>>>> the old non-DM stuff, I am not sure how this can encourage people to >>>>> switch to DM. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Correct. We definitely don't want to add new features to non-DM >>>> drivers / IF, if this is non-trivial. >>>> >>>>> Maybe I can check all boards that use xHCI to see if >>>>> they are switched to DM? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> xHCI is still quite new in U-Boot, so I would expect that all >>>> platforms using it, are using DM or at least not far away from using >>>> it. Yes, please check all xHCI "users", if they use DM. Then we >>>> know if and which users need some "persuasion" to switch over to >>>> DM soon. ;) >>> >>> >>> I checked all boards that have CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD defined but without >>> CONFIG_DM_USB. Here is the list. >>> >>> configs/uniphier_v8_defconfig:36:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/xilinx_zynqmp_zc1751_xm015_dc1_defconfig:62:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/am57xx_evm_nodt_defconfig:53:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/evb-rk3328_defconfig:34:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/ls1021atwr_nor_lpuart_defconfig:43:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/uniphier_pxs2_ld6b_defconfig:44:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/ls1012ardb_qspi_SECURE_BOOT_defconfig:43:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> >>> configs/ls1021atwr_sdcard_ifc_SECURE_BOOT_defconfig:57:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/k2e_hs_evm_defconfig:34:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/ls1021aqds_sdcard_qspi_defconfig:61:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/am43xx_evm_ethboot_defconfig:48:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/xilinx_zynqmp_ep_defconfig:70:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/ls1021aqds_nand_defconfig:57:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/ls1021atwr_qspi_defconfig:50:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/k2g_evm_defconfig:45:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/am57xx_evm_defconfig:63:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/am43xx_hs_evm_defconfig:49:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/am43xx_evm_defconfig:39:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/ls1021atwr_nor_defconfig:42:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/firefly-rk3399_defconfig:59:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/puma-rk3399_defconfig:78:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/cl-som-am57x_defconfig:55:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/ls1021aqds_nor_SECURE_BOOT_defconfig:43:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/uniphier_pro4_defconfig:43:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/xilinx_zynqmp_zc1751_xm016_dc2_defconfig:61:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/xilinx_zynqmp_zcu102_defconfig:63:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/ls1021atwr_nor_SECURE_BOOT_defconfig:42:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/cm_t43_defconfig:67:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/k2g_hs_evm_defconfig:36:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/am43xx_evm_qspiboot_defconfig:45:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/ls1021aqds_qspi_defconfig:50:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/am57xx_hs_evm_defconfig:67:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/xilinx_zynqmp_zcu102_revB_defconfig:63:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/ls1021aqds_sdcard_ifc_defconfig:55:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/uniphier_ld20_defconfig:39:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/am43xx_evm_usbhost_boot_defconfig:61:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/ls1021atwr_sdcard_qspi_defconfig:61:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/evb-rk3399_defconfig:60:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/k2hk_evm_defconfig:43:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/k2hk_hs_evm_defconfig:34:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/k2e_evm_defconfig:43:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/ls1021atwr_sdcard_ifc_defconfig:54:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> configs/k2l_evm_defconfig:43:CONFIG_USB_XHCI_HCD=y >>> >>> So it looks we have lots of conversion work to be done by many board >>> maintainers. I am not sure how to proceed on this. >> >> >> Marek reminded me, that he thinks that most of these platforms >> above will most likely select DM_USB implicitly via Kconfig. >> >> I did a quick check and it seems that at least these platforms >> have DM_USB enabled: >> >> ARCH_ZYNQ >> ARCH_ZYNQMP >> ARCH_UNIPHIER >> ARCH_ROCKCHIP >> >> and other from above very likely as well. >> >> Before you invest more time and effort into implementing the xHCI >> additions in a "non-DM cleaner way", I suggest to find out which >> targets really use xHCI without USB_DM. An easy check would be to >> add some #error to the non-DM part and run this commit through >> buildman / travis. >> >> What do you think? > > Ah, that's really a good idea. Thanks for the hints! I will launch a > buildman testing soon. >
Looks we have a smaller list indeed. Here is the buildman results: ls1012ardb_qspi_SECURE_BOOT ls1021atwr_nor_SECURE_BOOT am43xx_hs_evm am57xx_hs_evm ls1021aqds_nand ls1021atwr_nor ls1021atwr_qspi cm_t43 ls1021atwr_nor_lpuart ls1021aqds_sdcard_qspi k2hk_hs_evm am43xx_evm ls1021aqds_qspi am57xx_evm_nodt k2g_hs_evm ls1021atwr_sdcard_qspi am43xx_evm_ethboot ls1021aqds_sdcard_ifc k2l_evm am43xx_evm_usbhost_boot am43xx_evm_qspiboot k2g_evm am57xx_evm ls1021atwr_sdcard_ifc cl-som-am57x k2hk_evm k2e_evm ls1021atwr_sdcard_ifc_SECURE_BOOT ls1021aqds_nor_SECURE_BOOT k2e_hs_evm Regards, Bin _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
