On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 02:15:19PM +0200, Baruch Siach wrote: > Hi Miquel, > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 11:58:26AM +0100, Miquel Raynal wrote: > > Baruch Siach <baruch@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote on Sun, 24 Feb 2019 07:29:09 > > +0200: > > > > > On Fri, Feb 22 2019, Miquel Raynal wrote: > > > > There is no CP110 SATA port available on the 8040 Clearfog A8k, SATA > > > > may be used thanks to a mPCIe -> SATA extension board only. Hence, the > > > > cp1_sata0 node must be removed from the device tree. > > > > > > Not true. You can use the mini PCIe serdes as SATA directly if you > > > configure it as such. You only need to invert the serdes Rx pair > > > polarity. This is the default configuration for the Clearfog GT-8K CON3 > > > mini-PCIe slot (CP1, lane #0) in current mainline U-Boot. I verified > > > that this setup works on Clearfog GT-8K. > > > > > > This patch would break mini PCIe direct SATA. > > > > Thanks for explaining, I am a little bit surprised that it actually > > uses the SATA host IP on CP110 but fine. So can you tell me which SATA > > port is used in this case? Because I will have to update the DT > > representation along with the CP110 changes. > > According to the cp110_comphy_phy_mux_data[] array in U-Boot > drivers/phy/marvell/comphy_cp110.c, serdes 0 of CP110 can only be SATA1 (i.e. > the second port; first is SATA0). Adding folk from SolidRun... Why are the mPCIe connectors configured by default for mSATA cards? This sounds like it's going to cause confusion. The published specification for the board at: https://developer.solid-run.com/products/clearfog-gt-8k/ states that the board has "3 x mPCIe (USB 2.0 + PCIe)" and makes no mention of mSATA. mSATA is not compatible with mPCIe - mSATA cards expect the serdes lanes to be connected to a SATA interface, mPCIe cards expect a PCIe controller at the other end of the serdes lanes. Given that there is a lot of confusion about mSATA vs mPCIe out there, (caused by both being the same physical form factor and fitting into the same socket, yet being electrically different) I think it's important to have a coherent story on these connectors everywhere. Maybe we need a way to have these connectors configurable by the end user? -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 12.1Mbps down 622kbps up According to speedtest.net: 11.9Mbps down 500kbps up
