Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG

2012-09-18 Thread Fabio Estevam 
Hi Greg,

On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 10:00 AM, Greg Topmiller
greg.topmil...@jdsu.com wrote:
 Fabio/Benoit,

 I tried the get_board_rev alone and it worked on my mx51evk.

 In the FSL u-boot version I am using the set_board_rev is:
 static inline void set_board_rev(int rev)
 {
 system_rev |= (rev  0xF)  8;
 }

So you should call it as set_board_rev(BOARD_REV2) , where:
#define BOARD_REV2 0x1

I don't think we have boards older than rev2 anymore.

Looking at the FSL kernel, there are are some tests for if
(board_is_rev(BOARD_REV_2))
and they should return true from what I can see from the schematics.

 841 if (board_is_rev(BOARD_REV_2))
 842 /* BB2.5 */
 843 ret = gpio_get_value(BABBAGE_SD2_CD_2_5);
 844 else
 845 /* BB2.0 */
 846 ret = gpio_get_value(BABBAGE_SD2_CD_2_0);
 847 return ret;

With the original patch from Benoit board_is_rev(BOARD_REV_2) would
return falsem which would then assign the wrong SD2 card detect pin,
for example.

Regards,

Fabio Estevam
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG

2012-09-18 Thread Benoît Thébaudeau 
Hi Greg, Fabio,

On Tuesday, September 18, 2012 3:00:58 PM, Greg Topmiller wrote:
 Fabio/Benoit,
 
 I tried the get_board_rev alone and it worked on my mx51evk.
 
 In the FSL u-boot version I am using the set_board_rev is:
 static inline void set_board_rev(int rev)
 {
   system_rev |= (rev  0xF)  8;
 }
 
 It is not called for the mx51evk but is used for mx35_3stack.
 
 The set_board_rev code below doesn't make sense when looking at the
 FSL u-boot code or the main line and comparing to the mx51evk
 schematic.  I don't see where either the FSL u-boot or the main line
 u-boot set up iomux for GPIO0_22.  There are four pin possibilities,
 EIM_EB2, NANDF_CS6, CSPI1_MOSI, and UART3_RXD.  On the schematic the
 UART3_RXD is tied low so that would be the only pin to make sense in
 this case.  To make the set_board_rev code below work the mx51evk
 board specific code would have to set up the UART3_RXD to be
 GPIO0_22 by making its function ALT3.  That being said the code
 below would not be a problem since the if logic would most likely be
 positive in any case and the system_rev would be or'd with board rev
 2.
 
 Let me know if you want the schematic I'm looking at.  It's a PDF.
 
 Best Regards,
 
 Greg
 
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Fabio Estevam [mailto:feste...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 11:25 PM
 To: Benoît Thébaudeau
 Cc: U-Boot-Users ML; Greg Topmiller; Stefano Babic
 Subject: Re: [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG
 
 Hi Benoît ,
 
 On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Benoît Thébaudeau
 benoit.thebaud...@advansee.com wrote:
 
  +u32 get_board_rev(void)
  +{
  +   return get_cpu_rev();
  +}
 
 Is this enough?  Looking at FSL U-boot there is also a:
 
 static inline void set_board_rev(void)
 {
   if ((__REG(GPIO1_BASE_ADDR + 0x0)  (0x1  22)) == 0)
   system_rev |= BOARD_REV_2_0  BOARD_VER_OFFSET;
 
 }
 
 On mx53loco I had very weird problems when kernel was running and it
 took me sometime to find out that it was due to wrong detection of
 the board revision, so I suggest to double check this to avoid this
 kind of problem on mx51evk too.
 
 Regards,
 
 Fabio Estevam

It looks like there is confusion between the 3stack and Babbage boards here:
Fabio, the code you refer to in FSL U-Boot comes from the Babbage board, while
AFAIK, the mx51evk mainline U-Boot board corresponds to the 3stack board (this
is also FSL's naming for this board on their website).

Best regards,
Benoît
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG

2012-09-18 Thread Fabio Estevam 
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Benoît Thébaudeau
benoit.thebaud...@advansee.com wrote:

 It looks like there is confusion between the 3stack and Babbage boards here:
 Fabio, the code you refer to in FSL U-Boot comes from the Babbage board, while
 AFAIK, the mx51evk mainline U-Boot board corresponds to the 3stack board (this
 is also FSL's naming for this board on their website).

Not really,

mx51evk = mx51babbage

mx51_3stack is a different board.

Regards,

Fabio Estevam
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG

2012-09-18 Thread Benoît Thébaudeau 
On Tuesday, September 18, 2012 3:38:02 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
 On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Benoît Thébaudeau
 benoit.thebaud...@advansee.com wrote:
 
  It looks like there is confusion between the 3stack and Babbage
  boards here:
  Fabio, the code you refer to in FSL U-Boot comes from the Babbage
  board, while
  AFAIK, the mx51evk mainline U-Boot board corresponds to the 3stack
  board (this
  is also FSL's naming for this board on their website).
 
 Not really,
 
 mx51evk = mx51babbage
 
 mx51_3stack is a different board.

Now, I'm totally confused. FSL's website shows a board that really looks like a
3-stack board for its i.MX51 EVK:
http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=MCIMX51EVKJparentCode=i.MX515fpsp=1

Babbage here, different from i.MX51 EVK:
http://ossguy.com/?p=317

So, do you mean that mainline U-Boot board naming is broken for mx51evk?

Best regards,
Benoît
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG

2012-09-18 Thread Fabio Estevam 
Hi Benoît,

On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Benoît Thébaudeau
benoit.thebaud...@advansee.com wrote:

 Now, I'm totally confused. FSL's website shows a board that really looks like 
 a
 3-stack board for its i.MX51 EVK:
 http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=MCIMX51EVKJparentCode=i.MX515fpsp=1

Yes, the board names are confusing indeed ;-)

Let me clarify:  This is the official mx51 development board that
Freescale makes available. The website calls it mx51evk, which is the
name that we use in mainline U-boot.

Yes, you can attach a separate LCD and a daughter card to this mx51evk.

When the FSL development team started to work on kernel and bootloader
for this board, they used the internal name for it: mx51 babbage.

The first mx51 board that was designed was called mx51 3stack and it
is more of an internal board to the FSL development teams.

Looking at FSL u-boot source code, you will see mx51_bbg and
mx51_3stack targets.


 Babbage here, different from i.MX51 EVK:
 http://ossguy.com/?p=317

This is a mx51evk indeed, but without a WVGA LCD and the daughter card
and put in a plastic shell.

 So, do you mean that mainline U-Boot board naming is broken for mx51evk?

No, the name in U-boot mainline is fine and it matches the name in the website.

Hopefully I managed to clarify the board name confusion.

But back to the original patch: all you need to do is to pass
set_board_rev(BOARD_REV2), so that the kernel can correctly identify
the board revision correctly.

Regards,

Fabio Estevam
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG

2012-09-18 Thread Fabio Estevam 
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Fabio Estevam feste...@gmail.com wrote:

 But back to the original patch: all you need to do is to pass
 set_board_rev(BOARD_REV2), so that the kernel can correctly identify
 the board revision correctly.

To make it clearer:

get_board_rev should return 0x51100 , where 0x51 is SoC type and the
8th bit (1 is the board revision).

Regards,

Fabio Estevam
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG

2012-09-18 Thread Fabio Estevam 
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Greg Topmiller
greg.topmil...@jdsu.com wrote:
 So how about something like this in the board specific code?

 u32 get_board_rev(void)
 {
 u32 myrev = get_cpu_rev();
 myrev |= 0x100; /* BOARD_REV_2 */
 return myrev;
 }

Looks good, Greg.

Regards,

Fabio Estevam
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG

2012-09-18 Thread Stefano Babic 
On 18/09/2012 15:41, Benoît Thébaudeau wrote:
 Hi Greg, Fabio,
 
 On Tuesday, September 18, 2012 3:00:58 PM, Greg Topmiller wrote:
 Fabio/Benoit,

 I tried the get_board_rev alone and it worked on my mx51evk.

 In the FSL u-boot version I am using the set_board_rev is:
 static inline void set_board_rev(int rev)
 {
  system_rev |= (rev  0xF)  8;
 }

 It is not called for the mx51evk but is used for mx35_3stack.

 The set_board_rev code below doesn't make sense when looking at the
 FSL u-boot code or the main line and comparing to the mx51evk
 schematic.  I don't see where either the FSL u-boot or the main line
 u-boot set up iomux for GPIO0_22.  There are four pin possibilities,
 EIM_EB2, NANDF_CS6, CSPI1_MOSI, and UART3_RXD.  On the schematic the
 UART3_RXD is tied low so that would be the only pin to make sense in
 this case.  To make the set_board_rev code below work the mx51evk
 board specific code would have to set up the UART3_RXD to be
 GPIO0_22 by making its function ALT3.  That being said the code
 below would not be a problem since the if logic would most likely be
 positive in any case and the system_rev would be or'd with board rev
 2.

 Let me know if you want the schematic I'm looking at.  It's a PDF.

 Best Regards,

 Greg



 -Original Message-
 From: Fabio Estevam [mailto:feste...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 11:25 PM
 To: Benoît Thébaudeau
 Cc: U-Boot-Users ML; Greg Topmiller; Stefano Babic
 Subject: Re: [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG

 Hi Benoît ,

 On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Benoît Thébaudeau
 benoit.thebaud...@advansee.com wrote:

 +u32 get_board_rev(void)
 +{
 +   return get_cpu_rev();
 +}

 Is this enough?  Looking at FSL U-boot there is also a:

 static inline void set_board_rev(void)
 {
  if ((__REG(GPIO1_BASE_ADDR + 0x0)  (0x1  22)) == 0)
  system_rev |= BOARD_REV_2_0  BOARD_VER_OFFSET;

 }

 On mx53loco I had very weird problems when kernel was running and it
 took me sometime to find out that it was due to wrong detection of
 the board revision, so I suggest to double check this to avoid this
 kind of problem on mx51evk too.

 Regards,

 Fabio Estevam
 
 It looks like there is confusion between the 3stack and Babbage boards here:
 Fabio, the code you refer to in FSL U-Boot comes from the Babbage board, while
 AFAIK, the mx51evk mainline U-Boot board corresponds to the 3stack board (this
 is also FSL's naming for this board on their website).

There has been always confusion about Freescale's names.

Babbage was the internal name for the first mx51 development board. When
this board becomes available, it was referenced on Freescale's website
as mx51evk. So babbage = mx51evk.

Best regards,
Stefano Babic

-- 
=
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk  Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: +49-8142-66989-53 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80 Email: sba...@denx.de
=
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG

2012-09-18 Thread Stefano Babic 
On 18/09/2012 16:02, Fabio Estevam wrote:

 
 So, do you mean that mainline U-Boot board naming is broken for mx51evk?
 
 No, the name in U-boot mainline is fine and it matches the name in the 
 website.

Right. I dislike if the name is different as the official name. As we
can see, this generates a lot of confusion. IMHO we should also align
some other boards, such as mx53loco that is officially called mx53qsb.

Best regards,
Stefano Babic

-- 
=
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk  Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: +49-8142-66989-53 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80 Email: sba...@denx.de
=
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG

2012-09-18 Thread Benoît Thébaudeau 
Fabio,

On Tuesday, September 18, 2012 5:24:57 AM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
 Hi Benoît ,
 
 On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Benoît Thébaudeau
 benoit.thebaud...@advansee.com wrote:
 
  +u32 get_board_rev(void)
  +{
  +   return get_cpu_rev();
  +}
 
 Is this enough?  Looking at FSL U-boot there is also a:
 
 static inline void set_board_rev(void)
 {
   if ((__REG(GPIO1_BASE_ADDR + 0x0)  (0x1  22)) == 0)
   system_rev |= BOARD_REV_2_0  BOARD_VER_OFFSET;
 
 }

I have a question regarding this code: Is it normal that it does not enable a
weak pull-up (100 k) on UART3_RXD's pad? According to the schematic history, the
pull-down R6001 (10 k) has been added to UART3_RXD for revision 2. By default,
the pad of this pin has its keeper enabled, not its pull, so everything is fine
with this code for revision 2, but what about revision 1?

To reformulate my question: Was there anything on this board before R6001
inputting a high level on UART3_RXD, or does the pad keeper guarantee some
default init level by design if the pin is externally left floating?

Best regards,
Benoît
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mx51evk: Add CONFIG_REVISION_TAG

2012-09-17 Thread Fabio Estevam 
Hi Benoît ,

On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Benoît Thébaudeau
benoit.thebaud...@advansee.com wrote:

 +u32 get_board_rev(void)
 +{
 +   return get_cpu_rev();
 +}

Is this enough?  Looking at FSL U-boot there is also a:

static inline void set_board_rev(void)
{
if ((__REG(GPIO1_BASE_ADDR + 0x0)  (0x1  22)) == 0)
system_rev |= BOARD_REV_2_0  BOARD_VER_OFFSET;

}

On mx53loco I had very weird problems when kernel was running and it
took me sometime to find out that it was due to wrong detection of the
board revision, so I suggest to double check this to avoid this kind
of problem on mx51evk too.

Regards,

Fabio Estevam
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot