Hi Michael,
A minor suggestion to clarify the explanation (its HW that requires +1):
On 10/06/13 17:23, Michael Trimarchi wrote:
> Fix ulpi reading and writing function.
> * Both functions need to have the bit31 setted.
> * Right now uboot use 0 to enumerate port 1 and 1 to
> enumerate port 2 and so on. Omap code use 1 for port 1 and 2 for port 2.
---------------------------------^
The OMAP INSNREG05_ULPI register expects a value of 1 for Port 1 and of 2 for
Port 2 in the PORTSEL field.
> Add a +1 fix the problem
>
> Signed-off-by: Michael Trimarchi <mich...@amarulasolutions.com>
> ---
> drivers/usb/ulpi/omap-ulpi-viewport.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/ulpi/omap-ulpi-viewport.c
> b/drivers/usb/ulpi/omap-ulpi-viewport.c
> index 2a42033..4db7fa4 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/ulpi/omap-ulpi-viewport.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/ulpi/omap-ulpi-viewport.c
> @@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ static int ulpi_request(struct ulpi_viewport *ulpi_vp, u32
> value)
>
> int ulpi_write(struct ulpi_viewport *ulpi_vp, u8 *reg, u32 value)
> {
> - u32 val = (OMAP_ULPI_START | (ulpi_vp->port_num & 0xf) << 24) |
> + u32 val = OMAP_ULPI_START | (((ulpi_vp->port_num + 1) & 0xf) << 24) |
> OMAP_ULPI_WR_OPSEL | ((u32)reg << 16) | (value & 0xff);
>
> return ulpi_request(ulpi_vp, val);
> @@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ int ulpi_write(struct ulpi_viewport *ulpi_vp, u8 *reg, u32
> value)
> u32 ulpi_read(struct ulpi_viewport *ulpi_vp, u8 *reg)
> {
> int err;
> - u32 val = ((ulpi_vp->port_num & 0xf) << 24) |
> + u32 val = OMAP_ULPI_START | (((ulpi_vp->port_num + 1) & 0xf) << 24) |
> OMAP_ULPI_RD_OPSEL | ((u32)reg << 16);
>
> err = ulpi_request(ulpi_vp, val);
>
As for the patch itself, tested on a custom OMAP5430 board with a TUSB1210
ULPI PHY on USBB1:
Tested-by: Lubomir Popov <lpo...@mm-sol.com>
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
