Hi Marek, On 12/07/11 19:27, Marek Vasut wrote: >> On 12/07/11 03:42, Simon Glass wrote: >>> Hi Igor, >>> >>> Looks good - a few comments from me. >>> >>> On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 1:07 AM, Igor Grinberg <grinb...@compulab.co.il> > wrote: >>>> From: Jana Rapava <ferma...@gmail.com> >>>> >>>> Add partial ULPI specification implementation that should be enough to >>>> interface the ULPI PHYs in the boot loader context. >>>> Add a viewport implementation for Chipidea/ARC based controllers. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Jana Rapava <ferma...@gmail.com> >>>> Signed-off-by: Igor Grinberg <grinb...@compulab.co.il> >>>> Cc: Remy Bohmer <li...@bohmer.net> >>>> Cc: Stefano Babic <sba...@denx.de> >>>> Cc: Wolfgang Grandegger <w...@denx.de> >>>> Cc: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> >>>> ---
[...] >>> Just out of interest, is it possible to test this? How would I plumb it >>> in? >> >> Well, from my experience with ULPI hardware, >> I think the controller specific glue looks like the right place >> for putting the ULPI layer calls in. >> >> In general, the controller code knows which PHYs it supports >> and board code knows which PHY is assembled on the board, >> so it is not that straight simple to find the right place. >> >> I think, Marek has patches that supposed to use this framework on efikamx >> board. > > I tried using the interface, but the design seems completely wrong :-( Jana > was > supposed to design it mainly for the efikamx board, but this interface is > unusable there. May I ask you why? Isn't it because of that nasty VBUS bug efikamx has? You can't say the design is wrong if it is more generic then you want... > I had to fall back to basic ulpi_read()/ulpi_write() calls :-( That's too bad. Because ulpi_{read|write}() is only a viewport implementation and it is not following the ULPI spec. > I'm afraid we won't make it for .12 release window with this patches ... very > bad :-( I'll try talking to WD if he can push the release window to allow > this Good. > (or redesigned version) in, but I don't know if that's a good idea. I don't think it should be redesigned. Currently, it is generic and abstracts the ULPI specification nicely. It can be used on any architecture. I have already stated in the cover letter, what IMO is missing to improve usability, but that will not be a problem. Do you have the efikamx patches somewhere I can look at? -- Regards, Igor. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot