On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 09:21:18AM -0700, Tom Warren wrote:
Marek,
-----Original Message----- From: Marek Vasut [mailto:marex@denx.de] Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 4:47 PM To: Jim Lin Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de; Tom Warren; Stephen Warren Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] ARM: Tegra: USB: Add driver support for Tegra30/Tegra114
Dear Jim Lin,
Tegra30 and Tegra114 are compatible except 1. T30 takes 55 ms to finish Port Reset. T114 takes 50 ms. 2. PLL parameters
Tested on Tegra20 Harmony/Seaboard, Tegra30 Cardhu, and Tegra114 Dalmore platforms. All works well.
Signed-off-by: Jim Lin jilin@nvidia.com
arch/arm/include/asm/arch-tegra/clk_rst.h | 10 + arch/arm/include/asm/arch-tegra/usb.h | 249 ------------------ arch/arm/include/asm/arch-tegra114/tegra.h | 1 + arch/arm/include/asm/arch-tegra114/usb.h | 287
+++++++++++++++++++++
arch/arm/include/asm/arch-tegra20/usb.h | 279
+++++++++++++++++++++
arch/arm/include/asm/arch-tegra30/usb.h | 294
++++++++++++++++++++++
Do we now have three copies of the same stuff ?
When only T20 was supported (for USB), there was a common (arch-tegra/usb.h) header. That's been moved to arch-tegra20/usb.h, and (unfortunately) there are 2 new usb.h files due to the HW differences in the registers between T20 and T30/T114. I don't see any easy way to have a common usb.h file for Tegra w/o adding ugly #ifdefs to the USB register space struct(s).
Just how different are they? Are all of the related defines and masks different too? Do we have conflicts? Moved registers? Just conflicting values? A quick peek shows '30' and '114' are pretty similar, except for masks. Maybe splitting the struct up so you can discard some of the reserved gaps, run-time checking to see if we can or cannot use a particular part of the struct?