Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v3 01/11] sun6i: Add new p2wi controller driver
On Fri, 2014-11-07 at 20:46 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
From: Oliver Schinagl oli...@schinagl.nl
The A31 uses a new push-pull two wire interface, which features higher
transfer speeds (upto 6 MHz) in theory. While the hardware can burst 8
bytes each time, this driver will only see very little use and thus is
limited to single byte transmission only.
Signed-off-by: Oliver Schinagl oli...@schinagl.nl
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com
Acked-by: Ian Campbell i...@hellion.org.uk
One question:
+int p2wi_change_to_p2wi_mode(u8 slave_addr, u8 ctrl_reg, u8 init_data)
+{
+ struct sunxi_p2wi_reg *p2wi = (struct sunxi_p2wi_reg *)SUNXI_P2WI_BASE;
+ unsigned long tmo = timer_get_us() + 100;
+
+ writel(P2WI_PM_DEV_ADDR(slave_addr) |
+P2WI_PM_CTRL_ADDR(ctrl_reg) |
+P2WI_PM_INIT_DATA(init_data) |
+P2WI_PM_INIT_SEND,
+p2wi-pm);
+
+ while ((readl(p2wi-pm) P2WI_PM_INIT_SEND)) {
+ if (timer_get_us() tmo)
+ return -EFAULT;
You don't mean ETIME(DOUT) or something here, do you? EFAULT seems a bit
odd.
Ian.
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v3 01/11] sun6i: Add new p2wi controller driver
Hi,
On 11/08/2014 11:14 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Fri, 2014-11-07 at 20:46 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
From: Oliver Schinagl oli...@schinagl.nl
The A31 uses a new push-pull two wire interface, which features higher
transfer speeds (upto 6 MHz) in theory. While the hardware can burst 8
bytes each time, this driver will only see very little use and thus is
limited to single byte transmission only.
Signed-off-by: Oliver Schinagl oli...@schinagl.nl
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com
Acked-by: Ian Campbell i...@hellion.org.uk
One question:
+int p2wi_change_to_p2wi_mode(u8 slave_addr, u8 ctrl_reg, u8 init_data)
+{
+struct sunxi_p2wi_reg *p2wi = (struct sunxi_p2wi_reg *)SUNXI_P2WI_BASE;
+unsigned long tmo = timer_get_us() + 100;
+
+writel(P2WI_PM_DEV_ADDR(slave_addr) |
+ P2WI_PM_CTRL_ADDR(ctrl_reg) |
+ P2WI_PM_INIT_DATA(init_data) |
+ P2WI_PM_INIT_SEND,
+ p2wi-pm);
+
+while ((readl(p2wi-pm) P2WI_PM_INIT_SEND)) {
+if (timer_get_us() tmo)
+return -EFAULT;
You don't mean ETIME(DOUT) or something here, do you? EFAULT seems a bit
odd.
Yes, ETIME would be much better will fix for v4.
Regards,
Hans
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
