From: Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@baylibre.com>
To: Christian Hewitt <christianshewitt@gmail.com>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] soc: amlogic: meson-gx-socinfo: Fix S905X3 ID
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2020 14:45:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f037849a-0a23-8fdf-f953-28f62c0f9c62@baylibre.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ACA41DA3-88A4-4141-AEAD-C056C9834B6B@gmail.com>
On 08/06/2020 13:32, Christian Hewitt wrote:
>
>> On 8 Jun 2020, at 12:58 pm, Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@baylibre.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The current value is taken from Amlogic's 4.9 bsp kernel which appears
>>> to use the wrong ID. For comparison, here's before/after:
>>>
>>> [ 0.152237] soc soc0: Amlogic Meson SM1 (Unknown) Revision 2b:c (10:2) Detected
>>> [ 0.152463] soc soc0: Amlogic Meson SM1 (S905X3) Revision 2b:c (10:2) Detected
>>
>> For SM1 we have weird values, here are the one we gen on KernelCI:
>> SEI610 (S905D3):
>> Amlogic Meson SM1 (Unknown) Revision 2b:c (50:2)
>>
>> VIM3L (S905D3)
>> Amlogic Meson SM1 (Unknown) Revision 2b:c (4:2)
>>
>> And you report now:
>> Odroid-C4 (S905X4)
>> Amlogic Meson SM1 (Unknown) Revision 2b:c (10:2)
>>
>> And at the time you reported:
>> VIM3L (S905D3)
>> Amlogic Meson SM1 (S905D3) Revision 2b:c (b0:2)
>>
>> So I'm quite lost here….
>
> In [1] you added the SM1 SoC ID and S905X3 ID { "S905X3", 0x2b, 0x5, 0xf }
> which matches the BSP kernel source.
>
> In [2] I added a second S905X3 ID { "S905X3", 0x2b, 0xb0, 0xf2 } for VIM3L, but
> this was a mistake (the chip is S905D3) so [3] corrected it to { "S905D3", 0x2b,
> 0xb0, 0xf0 } which matches my VIM3L board. If the VIM3L’s in KernelCI now show
> "2b:c (4:2)” it looks there has been a package change (silicon fixes?) and we
> need to add another S905D3 package ID.
>
> In the last week I helped three different users install LE on S905X3 Android
> box devices, all of which declare "2b:c (10:2)” as the SoC ID, which matches
> the only S905X3 device I own (Odroid C4). So I assumed the BSP is wrong and
> sent this fix patch.
>
> If SEI610 is S905X3 (implied by the original SM1 submission from you) KernelCI
> output shows the current ID is wrong (‘Unknown’) so we probably need to fix it
> with { "S905X3", 0x2b, 0x50, 0xf0 } then add new S905D3 (VIM3L) and S905X3 (as
> per this patch) IDs.
>
> If SEI610 is S905D3 (as stated in this thread) the fix in this patch is still
> correct, but we also need to send a second patch to add two new S905D3 package
> IDs (SEI610 + VIM3L).
>
> I’ll ping you off-list to discuss.
OK, we have 5 different values :
S905X3 05 0000 0101 (first SEI610 support, early samples)
S905X3 10 0001 0000 (recent S905X3 android boxes, inc Odroid-C4)
S905X3 50 0101 0000 (SEI610 kernelci report, new SEI610 revision)
S905D3 04 0000 0100 (VIM3L in kernelci)
S905D3 b0 1011 0000 (VIM3L)
Seems the early S905X3/S905D3 samples used the low 4 bits to setup the revision.
And the mass-production ones uses the higher 4 bits.
So we can detect all these with the following bits & mask:
/* Early SM1 Samples */
{ "S905X3", 0x2b, 0x5 0xf5 },
{ "S905D3", 0x2b, 0x4 0xf5 },
/* Mass production SM1 */
{ "S905X3", 0x2b, 0x10, 0x3f },
{ "S905D3", 0x2b, 0x30 0x3f },
Neil
>
> Christian
>
> [1] c9cc9bec36d0 ("soc: amlogic: meson-gx-socinfo: Add SM1 and S905X3 ID”)
> [2] 1d7c541b8a5b ("soc: amlogic: meson-gx-socinfo: Add S905X3 ID for VIM3L”)
> [3] fdfc6997bd08 ("soc: amlogic: meson-gx-socinfo: Fix S905D3 ID for VIM3L”)
>
>
_______________________________________________
linux-amlogic mailing list
linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-amlogic
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-08 12:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-04 4:48 [PATCH] soc: amlogic: meson-gx-socinfo: Fix S905X3 ID Christian Hewitt
2020-06-08 8:58 ` Neil Armstrong
2020-06-08 11:32 ` Christian Hewitt
2020-06-08 12:45 ` Neil Armstrong [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=f037849a-0a23-8fdf-f953-28f62c0f9c62@baylibre.com \
--to=narmstrong@baylibre.com \
--cc=christianshewitt@gmail.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=khilman@baylibre.com \
--cc=linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).