Hi Gregory, On 16.12.2015 10:32, Gregory CLEMENT wrote: > Hi Joe, > > On mar., déc. 15 2015, Joe Hershberger <joe.hershber...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Gregory, >> >> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 10:37 AM, Gregory CLEMENT >> <gregory.clem...@free-electrons.com> wrote: >>> During the initialization of PHY the gigabit bit capable is set if the >>> controller is a GEM. However, for sama5d4, the GEM is not gigabit >>> capable. Improperly setting the GBE capability leads to an unresponsive >>> MAC controller. This patch fix this behavior allowing to use the gmac >>> with the sama5d4. >>> >>> Suggested-by: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.fe...@atmel.com> >>> Signed-off-by: Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clem...@free-electrons.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/net/macb.c | 7 +++++-- >>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/net/macb.c b/drivers/net/macb.c >>> index a5c1880..642717d 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/net/macb.c >>> +++ b/drivers/net/macb.c >>> @@ -480,8 +480,11 @@ static int macb_phy_init(struct macb_device *macb) >>> return 0; >>> } >>> >>> - /* First check for GMAC */ >>> - if (macb_is_gem(macb)) { >>> + /* >>> + * First check for GMAC, but not the one on SAMA5D4 which is >>> + * not gigabit capabale >>> + */ >>> + if (macb_is_gem(macb) && ! cpu_is_sama5d4()) { >> >> Is there not some other property that can identify the lack of Gigabit >> support in the "GEM"? It would be better to not have to keep track of >> the next processor and the one after that which has the same >> situation. > > I agree and I started to looked for this kind of information. But there > is not such information documented inside the controller. I also think > of the controller ID but I doubt that there is a link between the > gigabit capability and the version of the GEM. On sama5d3 the revision is > 0x119 and the one in sama5d4 is 0x120, so this really reflects the > version of the controller itself and not his capabilities.
You where faster ... answer my question before I was asking, at least to the timestamp of the mail ;) > I also had a look on how it was done in the kernel, and they relies on > the compatible string which is different for each SoC. We will get this also if the network detection has moved to DM completely. > Last thing, but it is only speculation, I think that the gigabit > capability depend on the SoC around the controller and not the > controller itself. Being able to do gigabit means being able to have > high speed dedicated lines and it is out of the scope of the controller > itself. An other hint is actually the fact that we have to set this GBE > bit in the configuration register of the controller, for me that means > that the controller is not aware of it. Good point. So could we please patch the macb_is_gem() then? I think we should also add the sama5d2 as Nicolas said this has also no GiB capability. Andreas > > Thanks, > > Gregory > >> >>> lpa = macb_mdio_read(macb, MII_STAT1000); >>> >>> if (lpa & (LPA_1000FULL | LPA_1000HALF)) { >>> -- >>> 2.5.0 >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> U-Boot mailing list >>> U-Boot@lists.denx.de >>> http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot > _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot