Hi Martin,
2018-04-28 23:20 GMT+09:00 Martin Blumenstingl
<martin.blumenstingl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> (adding Yixun from Amlogic to this mail)
>
> On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 4:41 AM, Masahiro Yamada
> <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hi Martin,
>>
>>
>> 2018-04-24 2:44 GMT+09:00 Martin Blumenstingl
>> <martin.blumenstingl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 1:03 PM, Masahiro Yamada
>>> <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> Historically, the clocks and resets are handled on the glue layer
>>>> side instead of the DWC3 core. For simple cases, dwc3-of-simple.c
>>>> takes care of arbitrary number of clocks and resets. The DT node
>>>> structure typically looks like as follows:
>>>>
>>>> dwc3-glue {
>>>> compatible = "foo,dwc3";
>>>> clocks = ...;
>>>> resets = ...;
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> dwc3 {
>>>> compatible = "snps,dwc3";
>>>> ...
>>>> };
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> By supporting the clocks and the reset in the dwc3/core.c, it will
>>>> be turned into a single node:
>>>>
>>>> dwc3 {
>>>> compatible = "foo,dwc3", "snps,dwc3";
>>>> clocks = ...;
>>>> resets = ...;
>>>> ...
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> This commit adds the binding of clocks and resets specific to this IP.
>>>> The number of clocks should generally be the same across SoCs, it is
>>>> just some SoCs either tie clocks together or do not provide software
>>>> control of some of the clocks.
>>>>
>>>> I took the clock names from the Synopsys datasheet: "ref" (ref_clk),
>>>> "bus_early" (bus_clk_early), and "suspend" (suspend_clk).
>>> looking at the code: this could mean that dwc3-exynos.c can be removed
>>> mid-term (assuming the PHY and regulator handling can be
>>> moved/removed/changed)
>>>
>>> does the datasheet state anything about the clock speeds? from
>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc3-xilinx.txt:
>>> "bus_clk" Master/Core clock, have to be >= 125 MHz for SS operation
>>> and >= 60MHz for HS operation
>>>
>>>> I found only one reset line in the datasheet, hence the reset-names
>>>> property is omitted.
>>> does the datasheet state whether this is a level or a pulsed reset line?
>>> on Amlogic Meson GXL, GXM and AXG SoCs we use a pulsed (and shared)
>>> reset line (see ff0a632f08759e "usb: dwc3: of-simple: add support for
>>> shared and pulsed reset lines") because the reset line is shared
>>> between various components (USB2 PHY, USB3 PHY, dwc3 controller, ...)
>>> your current approach (having a vendor-specific "foo,dwc3" binding
>>> along with the generic "snps,dwc3") would allow having
>>> per-"of_device_id" settings which could indicate whether the reset
>>> lines are level or pulsed reset if these are "implementation specific"
>>
>> Let me ask a question about your reset controller.
>> (drivers/reset/reset-meson.c)
>>
>> All reset ID supports .reset, .assert, .deassert
>> Is this correct?
> as far as I know: yes (though I have only ever verified this with the
> Ethernet controller's reset line)
>
>>
>> I believe you and I use the same DWC3 core IP.
> this is possible - but I am not sure since I don't have access to
> Amlogic's internal resources where this should be documented (my
> knowledge mostly comes from reading Amlogic's out-of-tree kernel code
> and porting that to mainline)
>
>>
>> I suspect the difference is in the reset controller side.
>>
>> In my case, the reset line is asserted by default.
>> (that is, all FFs in the RTL are put into the initial state
>> on power-on)
>> That's why only reset_deassert() will work for me, I think.
>>
>> What about your case? Is the reset line in deassert state on power-on?
>> Then, the reset must be explicitly pulsed to put FFs into
>> the initial state. Is this correct?
> let me give you a bit of context first:
> the Amlogic Meson AXG, GXL and GXM SoCs have one reset line for "USB
> components". this is shared among:
> - the dwc3 controller
> - (depending on the SoC) 2 or 3 USB2 PHYs
> - a USB3 PHY
> - some OTG detection logic within the registers of the USB3 PHY
>
> (there is also a gate clock which is assigned to the same components)
>
> based on my tests I believe that the reset line is "de-asserted" (=
> USB components are working) by default.
> asserting that reset line should stop the state machine of all USB
> components. de-asserting it again should bring all USB components into
> a defined state.
> (I'm not sure though if these are HW defaults or if there's some logic
> in the bootrom / early stage [pre u-boot] bootloaders)
>
> that said, the "reset" framework currently cannot handle level resets
> with shared reset lines which are de-asserted by default.
> to bring the USB components into a defined state I would have to use
> reset_control_assert() first, then reset_control_deassert(). the reset
> framework reports an error in this case: [0]
> using a reset pulse however works in any case, the reset framework
> ensures that it's only executed once for all shared reset lines (our
> reset controller hardware probably asserts and de-asserts the reset
> line internally - this is just speculation though)
>
>
> Regards
> Martin
>
>
> [0] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v4.17-rc2/source/drivers/reset/core.c#L317
Sorry for the late reply.
Personally, I'd like to see a generic solution
instead of tweaking the reset consumer (dwc3-of-simple.c)
I am not sure what the right thing to do,
but just threw this post:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/5/10/116
--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
