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.ziswi...@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 <ma...@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.ziswi...@toradex.com> Tested-on: Colibri T20/T30 on Colibri Evaluation Board _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot