On Tue, 9 Aug 2016 14:32:14 +0200
Marek Vasut <ma...@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.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
> > Will this be applied for the upcoming release? Alban
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
