On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:24 PM, Michael Trimarchi <michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi > > On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 09:59:35PM +0300, Ruslan Bilovol wrote: >> Hello guys, >> >> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 8:56 PM, Michael Trimarchi >> <michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Hi Roger >> > >> > On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 05:49:41PM +0300, Roger Quadros wrote: >> >> +Ruslan >> >> >> >> On 06/27/2013 05:17 PM, Michael Trimarchi wrote: >> >> > Hi Roger >> >> > >> >> > On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 04:59:38PM +0300, Roger Quadros wrote: >> >> >> Hi Michael, >> >> >> >> >> >> On 06/27/2013 02:51 PM, Michael Trimarchi wrote: >> >> >>> Hi >> >> >>> >> >> >>> I'm working on omap4460 with two ulpi connected to (SMSC3320 -> HUB SMSC2514) or (TUSB1210 -> HUB SMSC2514). >> >> >>> The problem only happen when both port are used and after few suspend resume are triggered. >> >> >>> If I use just one port there is no issue on suspend resume. I already covered all TI >> >> >>> errata that I know and I'm working on TI kernel. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> The problem is here >> >> >>> >> >> >>> [ 77.701934] ehci-omap ehci-omap.0: irq status a004 Async Recl PCD >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Both ports change status from 001005 to 001009 (you have a log just after). >> >> >>> So from host point of view both hub connected are not working in HS mode. >> >> >>> After that the omap ehci has gone because the bus can not work in FS and LS and I can not recover from here. >> >> >>> Status of transceivers are dumped and they are ok after resume. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Do you have any suggestion? >> >> >> >> >> >> I'm not very sure but both ports suddenly changing state like that look like >> >> >> a hardware issue. Also, it is strange that you can reproduce it only when two >> >> >> ports are simultaneously in use. Unfortunately, I can't match your setup with 2 ULPI >> >> > >> >> > Yes I know that TI doesn't have any setup like that. >> >> > >> >> >> ports. >> >> >> >> >> >> I have a OMAP5 uEVM that uses 2 ports but it won't be identical to your setup as >> >> >> they are on HSIC and not ULPI. >> >> >> >> >> >> Did you try errata i693? >> >> > >> >> > Yes I have it. It's not clear if I need to wait after >> >> > ehci_writel(ehci, temp | PORT_SUSPEND, status_reg); >> >> > polling the suspendM of the SMSC or the suspend status of the PORT or I can >> >> > switch just after this instruction. Because TI kernel use an msleep of 4 mseconds and then switch. It could be a timing issue on how errata is implemented when I have two ports? How this internal count works? >> >> >> >> >> >> The OMAP EHCI controller transparently sets the suspendM bit of the PHY when you >> >> set the PORT_SUSPEND feature on the EHCI port. So you don't need to poll for anything. >> >> >> > >> > A delay is necessary. If we apply the errata to the port before a delay the errata >> > doesn't work. >> > >> > /* Use internal 60Mhz clock ULPIBx */ >> > temp_reg = omap_readl(L3INIT_HSUSBHOST_CLKCTRL); >> > temp_reg |= 1 << (8 + port); >> > temp_reg &= ~(1 << (24 + port)); >> > omap_writel(temp_reg, L3INIT_HSUSBHOST_CLKCTRL); >> > >> > /* Wait 2ms to have transceiver transaction */ >> > mdelay(2); >> > >> > /* Use external clock ULPIBx */ >> > temp_reg &= ~(1 << (8 + port)); >> > temp_reg |= 1 << (24 + port); >> > omap_writel(temp_reg, L3INIT_HSUSBHOST_CLKCTRL); >> > >> > Now it's not clear to me what happen if I apply this clock too early (transeceiver still >> > driver the clock) or too late. Any clue? >> >> We need to wait 3ms for entire USB bus to go into suspend after >> setting the PORT_SUSPEND bit. During this time, internal OMAP EHCI logic >> will communicate with PHY so it is not safe to switch the clocks to >> internal source. >> That's why with 2ms delay it fails. 4ms delay (3ms + 1ms for safety) >> is enough here >> and is successfully used last few years for production devices. > > Well this mdelay is the switch of the clock and not the delay after > PORT_SUSPEND. So after writing PORT_SUSPEND I need to wait > 4ms and then in 2ms you have a lot of clock to reach the 18 count. Correct? Yes, sorry for confusing :) Moreover, 2ms is more than enough, errata document says about 1ms delay (and probably may be decreased up to few useconds) > > Anyway I understand, but why both hub connected to the smsc3320 move from > HS to FS? So it's not important if there is a drift of delay but it must > be >= 4ms. Correct? > > The code works if I just use one port or remove one hub ;) > > Now the code is like this: > > temp &= ~(PORT_WKCONN_E | PORT_RWC_BITS); > temp |= PORT_WKDISC_E | PORT_WKOC_E; > ehci_writel(ehci, temp | PORT_SUSPEND, status_reg); > > mdelay(4); > omap_ehci_erratum_i693(ehci, ((wIndex & 0xff) - 1)); > > The code of the function is up on this email. Do you have locks around this software workaround? The patch I did against 3.4 linux kernel may be helpful for you in such case: http://review.omapzoom.org/28515 Another patch extends this WA for all OMAP4 SoCs: http://review.omapzoom.org/31108 Regards Ruslan > > Michael > >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Ruslan Bilvol >> >> > >> > >> >> What the errata says is that once software sets the PORT_SUSPEND feature, the PHY will >> >> got into suspend and cut the PHY clock sooner than required for the EHCI controller to >> >> complete its suspend operations. (NOTE: this is only applicable when the PHY is providing the >> >> ulpi_clk). >> >> >> > >> > Yes this is the case >> > >> >> What the workaround does is to just wait for a while (don't know why 4ms), and remux the >> >> ulpi_clock to an internal 60MHz clock for a while so that it can complete its suspend operations. >> > >> > What happen if I apply a big delay after PORT_SUSPEND. Will the internal state machine of the omap >> > continue to wait the clock? >> > >> > Michael >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> > First time is 18, and then? >> >> > >> >> I think it is 18 for every port suspend. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Also, are you suspending and resuming only the USB or the entire system? >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > Whole system. Right the only susbsytem that doens't go to suspend is the FSUSB >> >> > but this depends on the bootloader. >> >> >> >> OK. >> >> >> >> cheers, >> >> -roger >> > -- >> > 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 > -- > 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 -- 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
