Hi Priyanka,
On Thursday, November 21, 2019 13:26, Priyanka Jain wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Ran Wang ran.wang_1@nxp.com Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 11:20 AM To: Priyanka Jain priyanka.jain@nxp.com; Albert Aribaud albert.u.boot@aribaud.net Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de; Ran Wang ran.wang_1@nxp.com Subject: [PATCH v4] armv8: Add workaround for USB erratum A-050106
USB3.0 Receiver needs to enable fixed equalization for each of PHY instances in an SOC. This is similar to erratum A-009007, but this one is for LX2160A, and the register value is different.
Signed-off-by: Ran Wang ran.wang_1@nxp.com
Change in v4:
- Include defines of USB_PHY_RX_EQ_VAL_3 and
USB_PHY_RX_EQ_VAL_4 for LS1028A to fix compile failure.
Change in v3:
- Rebase patch for latest U-Boot (v2019.10)
Change in v2:
- Move function erratum_a050106() under the scope of CONFIG_FSL_LSCH3 to avoid compilation warning of 'defined but not used'.
arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/Kconfig | 4 ++++ arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/soc.c | 12 +++++++++++- arch/arm/include/asm/arch-fsl-layerscape/immap_lsch3.h | 6 ++++++ 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/Kconfig b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/Kconfig index f1578b1..c7f28b6 100644 --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/Kconfig +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/Kconfig @@ -219,6 +219,7 @@ config ARCH_LX2160A select SYS_FSL_DDR_VER_50 select SYS_FSL_EC1 select SYS_FSL_EC2
- select SYS_FSL_ERRATUM_A050106 select SYS_FSL_HAS_RGMII select SYS_FSL_HAS_SEC select SYS_FSL_HAS_CCN508
@@ -348,6 +349,9 @@ config SYS_FSL_ERRATUM_A009008 config SYS_FSL_ERRATUM_A009798 bool "Workaround for USB PHY erratum A009798"
+config SYS_FSL_ERRATUM_A050106
- bool "Workaround for USB PHY erratum A050106"
Please fix checkpatch warning WARNING: please write a paragraph that describes the config symbol fully #35: FILE: arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/Kconfig:352: +config SYS_FSL_ERRATUM_A050106
total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 0 checks, 60 lines checked
Actually I followed the history erratum workaround patches to do this. And it seems to be OK to ignore that warning,
Please check: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/809597/ http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/809598/ http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/809603/ http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/809599/ http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/809604/ http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/809600/ http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/809601/ http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/809602/ http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/817358/ http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1098612/
Thanks & Regards, Ran