Please test updated U-Boot Beagle revision detection
Dirk Behme
U-Boot (v1) patch [1] to detect Beagle revisions was reported to
detect rev C3 wrongly (C1/2 was detected instead [2]). It seems that
the state of GPIO 172 wasn't detected properly. I now changed the
patch to _disable_ pull of GPIO 172 as stated by Gerald in [3].
As I don't have a C3 (and C4 prototype) and we change the pull
configuration of GPIO 172, it would be nice if you could help testing.
For this, updated patch and U-Boot binary in attachment. The question
is if board revision matches the revision reported by U-Boot.
If we get positive testing on Ax/Bx, C1/2, C3 and C4 I'd like to send
updated patch to U-Boot list.
Many thanks for testing and best regards
Dirk
Btw.: Gerald: Any news on the other necessary C4 changes?
[1] http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-December/065502.html
[2] http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-December/065575.html
[3] http://groups.google.com/group/beagleboard/msg/6f75fae713c7e3a2
Gerald Coley
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Beagle Board" group.
To post to this group, send email to beagl...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to beagleboard...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/beagleboard?hl=en.
Syed Mohammed, Khasim
> No. Khasim has not provided anything.
>
I was travelling for Tech Days, I am back to work this week. I will be
sending all the patches in next two days.
Sorry to keep you all waiting.
Regards,
Khasim
Dirk Behme
> On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 7:58 AM, Gerald Coley<ger...@beagleboard.org> wrote:
>> No. Khasim has not provided anything.
>>
>
> I was travelling for Tech Days, I am back to work this week. I will be
> sending all the patches in next two days.
Please note that we are not talking about patches. We are talking
about detailed _information_ (register values?) what has to be changed
for C4.
http://groups.google.com/group/beagleboard/msg/6048a53abb3782b5
Gerald: Have you been able to test the new revision detection on C4?
Best regards
Dirk
Gerald Coley
Syed Mohammed, Khasim
| 173 | 172 | 171 | board |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| high low high
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| 1 0 1
Bx |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| 1 0 0
C2 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| 1 0 0
C3 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| 1 0 1
C4 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I even tried pulling the GPIO_172 line high, in this case 172 was
always high, Looks like 172 is not changing from the initial
configuration.
Regards,
Khasim
Syed Mohammed, Khasim
| 173 | 172 | 171 | board |
--------------------------------------------------------------
| hi lo hi |
--------------------------------------------------------------
| 1 0 1 Bx |
-------------------------------------------------------------
| 1 0 0 C2 |
--------------------------------------------------------------
| 1 0 0 C3 |
--------------------------------------------------------------
| 1 0 1 C4 |
-------------------------------------------------------------
Dirk Behme
Do you like to try u-boot.bin from [1] and let us know what it reports
on the (hopefully various) boards you have?
Many thanks
Dirk
[1] http://groups.google.com/group/beagleboard/msg/312ed6e276a3d1ce
Syed Mohammed, Khasim
> Hi Khasim,
>
> Do you like to try u-boot.bin from [1] and let us know what it reports on
> the (hopefully various) boards you have?
>
On C3 - Reports as "C3"
On C2 - Reports as "C3"
On B5 - Reports as "C4"
Regards,
Khasim
Dirk Behme
> On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Dirk Behme<dirk....@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Khasim,
>>
>> Do you like to try u-boot.bin from [1] and let us know what it reports on
>> the (hopefully various) boards you have?
>>
> On C4 - Reports as "C4"
> On C3 - Reports as "C3"
> On C2 - Reports as "C3"
> On B5 - Reports as "C4"
:(
Looks to me that we are not able to properly detect all revisions, then.
Gerald: Any further idea? Is there some incompatible HW configuration
between the board revisions preventing us from properly detecting them?
The recent patch [1] implements what you described in
http://groups.google.com/group/beagleboard/msg/6f75fae713c7e3a2
This would result in different U-Boot (binary/build target) for C4 :(
Best regards
Dirk
[1] http://groups.google.com/group/beagleboard/msg/312ed6e276a3d1ce
Koen Kooi
Op 21 dec 2009, om 12:05 heeft Dirk Behme het volgende geschreven:
> On 21.12.2009 09:49, Syed Mohammed, Khasim wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Dirk Behme<dirk....@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Khasim,
>>>
>>> Do you like to try u-boot.bin from [1] and let us know what it reports on
>>> the (hopefully various) boards you have?
>>>
>> On C4 - Reports as "C4"
>> On C3 - Reports as "C3"
>> On C2 - Reports as "C3"
>> On B5 - Reports as "C4"
>
> :(
>
> Looks to me that we are not able to properly detect all revisions, then.
B5 has 3530ES2.x, while Cx has 3530ES3.x, so you could use that :) It does leave B7....
regards,
Koen
Gerald Coley
Syed Mohammed, Khasim
> As was already stated earlier by Steve statement, Khasim's C4 board will NOT
> work. The resistor value is incorreect on his board. R112 needs to be a 510
> ohm instead of the 10K that is there now.
>
"1", in that case do we have to take both silicon and GPIO's in
consideration ?
Regards,
Khasim
Gerald Coley
Syed Mohammed, Khasim
> On B5, there is nothing connected to GPIO172. If you setup the internal
> pullups, it should show Hi. We didn't start the board ID until Rev C. So,
> all Bx boards if setup correctly should read all ones.
is always low on Bx. Does this mean C4 (111) and Bx(101) ??
Regards,
Khasim
Gerald Coley
Syed Mohammed, Khasim
> On the Rev B boards, there are no resistors at all. They would all be a one
> if the pullups were enabled. Rev Bx would be "111", rev C3 is a "011" and
> Rev C4 is "101"
>
(173,172,171)
(1,1,1) - B5
(1,1,0) - C2
(1,1,0) - C3
(1,0,1) - C4
I think this is as expected, but I had to put GPIO 172 as pull up in
the MUX. We might have to report C2/C3 together.
Dirk, you need to change the patch to put GPIO 172 back to pull up,
MUX_VAL(CP(MCSPI1_CLK), (IEN | PTU | EN | M4)) /*GPIO_171*/\
MUX_VAL(CP(MCSPI1_SIMO), (IEN | PTU | EN | M4)) /*GPIO_172*/\
MUX_VAL(CP(MCSPI1_SOMI), (IEN | PTU | EN | M4)) /*GPIO_173*/\
Gerald Coley
Dirk Behme
> On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 7:57 PM, Gerald Coley<ger...@beagleboard.org> wrote:
>> On the Rev B boards, there are no resistors at all. They would all be a one
>> if the pullups were enabled. Rev Bx would be "111", rev C3 is a "011" and
>> Rev C4 is "101"
>>
> After I get the R112 Corrected, I see the below:
>
> (173,172,171)
> (1,1,1) - B5
> (1,1,0) - C2
> (1,1,0) - C3
> (1,0,1) - C4
>
> I think this is as expected, but I had to put GPIO 172 as pull up in
> the MUX. We might have to report C2/C3 together.
>
> Dirk, you need to change the patch to put GPIO 172 back to pull up,
>
> MUX_VAL(CP(MCSPI1_CLK), (IEN | PTU | EN | M4)) /*GPIO_171*/\
> MUX_VAL(CP(MCSPI1_SIMO), (IEN | PTU | EN | M4)) /*GPIO_172*/\
> MUX_VAL(CP(MCSPI1_SOMI), (IEN | PTU | EN | M4)) /*GPIO_173*/\
Ok, thanks!
Updated patch and u-boot.bin for testing in attachment.
Thanks
Dirk