On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 01:43:46PM +0530, Archit Taneja wrote: > On Wednesday 18 April 2012 01:36 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Mon, 2012-04-09 at 12:41 +0530, Archit Taneja wrote: >>> This reverts commit 46f8c3c7e95c0d30d95911e7975ddc4f93b3e237. >>> >>> The commit above swapped the DSI1_PPID and DSI2_PPID register fields in >>> CONTROL_DSIPHY to be in sync with the newer public OMAP TRMs(after version V). >>> >>> With this commit, contention errors were reported on DSI lanes some OMAP4 SDPs. >>> After probing the DSI lanes on OMAP4 SDP, it was seen that setting bits in the >>> DSI2_PPID field was pulling up voltage on DSI1 lanes, and DSI1_PPID field was >>> pulling up voltage on DSI2 lanes. >>> >>> This proves that the current version of OMAP4 TRM is incorrect, swap the >>> position of register fields according to the older TRM versions as they were >>> correct. >> >> Are we sure the bits are the same for all OMAP4 versions? I'm just >> wondering why the change was made to TRM... > > I've tried on OMAP4430 ES2.1 and OMAP4460 ES1.1. I can try on a couple > more revisions. > > As far as why the change was made in the TRM, it's a bit hard to find > the right people, or get response from them :), I'll give that a try > again. > > If we do conclude that this revert patch is needed, it might probably be > a candidate for the 3.2 and 3.3 stable kernels, just wanted to point > that out. I was just going to ask about this, as I haven't noticed any improvement in mainline kernels since I reported the original failure... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
