On 08/11/2016 12:28 PM, Alban Bedel wrote:
On Thu, 11 Aug 2016 11:26:23 +0200 Marek Vasut marex@denx.de wrote:
On 08/11/2016 10:52 AM, Alban Bedel wrote:
On Tue, 9 Aug 2016 14:32:14 +0200 Marek Vasut marex@denx.de wrote:
On 08/09/2016 02:14 PM, Marcel Ziswiler wrote:
On Thu, 2016-08-04 at 11:12 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
On 08/04/2016 11:07 AM, Alban Bedel wrote: > > On Wed, 3 Aug 2016 15:23:30 +0000 > Marcel Ziswiler marcel.ziswiler@toradex.com wrote: > >> >> On Wed, 2016-08-03 at 15:51 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: >>> >>> On 08/03/2016 11:46 AM, Alban Bedel wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, 3 Aug 2016 09:00:42 +0200 >>>> Marek Vasut marex@denx.de wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 08/03/2016 07:32 AM, Alban Bedel wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Commit 147271209a9d ("net: asix: fix operation without >>>>>> eeprom") >>>>>> added a special handling for ASIX 88772B that enable >>>>>> another >>>>>> type of header. This break the driver in DM mode as the >>>>>> extra >>>>>> handling >>>>>> needed in the receive path is missing. >>>>> So add the extra handling ? >>>> I can do that too, but I though u-boot preferred to avoid >>>> useless >>>> code. >>> Yes, if it is useless. >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> However this new header mode is not required and only >>>>>> seems to >>>>>> increase the code complexity, so this patch revert this >>>>>> part of >>>>>> commit 147271209a9d. >>>>> Why is it not required ? >>>> It works fine without, since 2012. In fact this change is not >>>> even >>>> mentioned in the log of commit 147271209a9d, so I really >>>> don't know >>>> why >>>> it was added in the first place. As can be seen in the revert >>>> all >>>> it >>>> does is adding 2 bytes to the USB packets that are then just >>>> skipped. >>>> Seems pretty useless to me. >>> I would like to get some feedback on this from Marcel, since he >>> added >>> this stuff. >> Yes, sorry. I just came back from vacation and started looking >> into it >> now. As far as I remember on our hardware without this Ethernet >> did not >> quite work reliably. This also means that with driver model so >> far it >> does not work for us which I fed back to Simon once but so far >> this has >> not been resolved. That fix came from some early U-Boot work done >> by >> Antmicro way back and I am missing some of the history. > Then I'll do a new patch that just fix the driver model receive > path. Hold on. Marcel, can you maybe test if removing this code has any impact on the behavior now ?
Sorry for the delay. I tested Alban's patch now both on Toradex Colibri T20 as well as T30 and its on-module ASIX USB-to-Ethernet chip actually works perfectly aside from the occasional EHCI timed out on TD - token=0x88008d80 Rx: failed to receive: -5 message which last I checked with Simon is still unresolved but was already there long before any of the driver model work started.
Tested-by: Marcel Ziswiler marcel.ziswiler@toradex.com Tested-on: Colibri T20/T30 on Colibri Evaluation Board
Will this be applied for the upcoming release?
Yeah. Why the hurry though ?
I was just wondering because all the other patches I submitted have been applied but this one still seems to be on hold.
Well because this one was broken, so I had to throw it away. Please do make sure next time that the stuff builds using buildman.