[U-Boot] Targets with xHCI but without DM_USB

[U-Boot] Targets with xHCI but without DM_USB

[Stefan Roese]

Hi,

as you might have noticed, Bin Meng is currently greatly improving
the U-Boot xHCI support. While doing this, he noticed that some
additions are more complex and especially ugly to add, since some
users of the xHCI support have not enabled CONFIG_DM_USB. This
adds ugly #ifdef's, which we really would like to avoid. Because
of this we checked, which boards exactly are using xHCI without
DM_USB enabled. Here a complete list of all the boards:

ls1012ardb_qspi_SECURE_BOOT
ls1021atwr_nor_SECURE_BOOT
am43xx_hs_evm
am57xx_hs_evm
ls1021aqds_nand
ls1021atwr_nor
ls1021atwr_qspi
cm_t43
ls1021atwr_nor_lpuart
ls1021aqds_sdcard_qspi
k2hk_hs_evm
am43xx_evm
ls1021aqds_qspi
am57xx_evm_nodt
k2g_hs_evm
ls1021atwr_sdcard_qspi
am43xx_evm_ethboot
ls1021aqds_sdcard_ifc
k2l_evm
am43xx_evm_usbhost_boot
am43xx_evm_qspiboot
k2g_evm
am57xx_evm
ls1021atwr_sdcard_ifc
cl-som-am57x
k2hk_evm
k2e_evm
ls1021atwr_sdcard_ifc_SECURE_BOOT
ls1021aqds_nor_SECURE_BOOT
k2e_hs_evm

So I'm sending this mail to you, the maintainers of the boards above
and would like you to check, if you can enable DM_USB for these
boards. This would be great, as it would bring the xHCI support into
a much better state, with only DM_USB enabled.

Thanks for your feedback in advance.

Thanks,
Stefan

[U-Boot] Targets with xHCI but without DM_USB

[Vignesh R]

Hi Stefan,

On Thursday 29 June 2017 11:15 AM, Stefan Roese wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> as you might have noticed, Bin Meng is currently greatly improving
> the U-Boot xHCI support. While doing this, he noticed that some
> additions are more complex and especially ugly to add, since some
> users of the xHCI support have not enabled CONFIG_DM_USB. This
> adds ugly #ifdef's, which we really would like to avoid. Because
> of this we checked, which boards exactly are using xHCI without
> DM_USB enabled. Here a complete list of all the boards:
> 
> ls1012ardb_qspi_SECURE_BOOT
> ls1021atwr_nor_SECURE_BOOT
> am43xx_hs_evm
> am57xx_hs_evm
> ls1021aqds_nand
> ls1021atwr_nor
> ls1021atwr_qspi
> cm_t43
> ls1021atwr_nor_lpuart
> ls1021aqds_sdcard_qspi
> k2hk_hs_evm
> am43xx_evm
> ls1021aqds_qspi
> am57xx_evm_nodt
> k2g_hs_evm
> ls1021atwr_sdcard_qspi
> am43xx_evm_ethboot
> ls1021aqds_sdcard_ifc
> k2l_evm
> am43xx_evm_usbhost_boot
> am43xx_evm_qspiboot
> k2g_evm
> am57xx_evm
> ls1021atwr_sdcard_ifc
> cl-som-am57x
> k2hk_evm
> k2e_evm
> ls1021atwr_sdcard_ifc_SECURE_BOOT
> ls1021aqds_nor_SECURE_BOOT
> k2e_hs_evm

For TI platforms, there is some work needed to convert xhci-dwc3,
xhci-omap and xhci-keystone to DM (under drivers/usb/host)

But the bigger concern of enabling DM_USB is with gadget framework,
which is not DM compliant yet. There is a significant amount work[1][2]
there before dwc3 gadget can be moved to DM and we can enable DM_USB.

[1]https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2017-June/296081.html
[2]https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2017-June/295370.html

-- 
Regards
Vignesh

[U-Boot] Targets with xHCI but without DM_USB

[Bin Meng]

Hi Vignesh,

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com> wrote:
> Hi Stefan,
>
> On Thursday 29 June 2017 11:15 AM, Stefan Roese wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> as you might have noticed, Bin Meng is currently greatly improving
>> the U-Boot xHCI support. While doing this, he noticed that some
>> additions are more complex and especially ugly to add, since some
>> users of the xHCI support have not enabled CONFIG_DM_USB. This
>> adds ugly #ifdef's, which we really would like to avoid. Because
>> of this we checked, which boards exactly are using xHCI without
>> DM_USB enabled. Here a complete list of all the boards:
>>
>> ls1012ardb_qspi_SECURE_BOOT
>> ls1021atwr_nor_SECURE_BOOT
>> am43xx_hs_evm
>> am57xx_hs_evm
>> ls1021aqds_nand
>> ls1021atwr_nor
>> ls1021atwr_qspi
>> cm_t43
>> ls1021atwr_nor_lpuart
>> ls1021aqds_sdcard_qspi
>> k2hk_hs_evm
>> am43xx_evm
>> ls1021aqds_qspi
>> am57xx_evm_nodt
>> k2g_hs_evm
>> ls1021atwr_sdcard_qspi
>> am43xx_evm_ethboot
>> ls1021aqds_sdcard_ifc
>> k2l_evm
>> am43xx_evm_usbhost_boot
>> am43xx_evm_qspiboot
>> k2g_evm
>> am57xx_evm
>> ls1021atwr_sdcard_ifc
>> cl-som-am57x
>> k2hk_evm
>> k2e_evm
>> ls1021atwr_sdcard_ifc_SECURE_BOOT
>> ls1021aqds_nor_SECURE_BOOT
>> k2e_hs_evm
>
> For TI platforms, there is some work needed to convert xhci-dwc3,
> xhci-omap and xhci-keystone to DM (under drivers/usb/host)
>
> But the bigger concern of enabling DM_USB is with gadget framework,
> which is not DM compliant yet. There is a significant amount work[1][2]
> there before dwc3 gadget can be moved to DM and we can enable DM_USB.
>
> [1]https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2017-June/296081.html
> [2]https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2017-June/295370.html

I thought gadget and host support are separate, so host support like
xHCI can be moved to DM without affecting gadget support, no? Are they
sharing some codes?

Other board maintainers, your comments are welcome.

Regards,
Bin

[U-Boot] Targets with xHCI but without DM_USB

[Vignesh R]

Hi Bin,

On Monday 03 July 2017 06:49 PM, Bin Meng wrote:
> Hi Vignesh,
> 
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com> wrote:
>> Hi Stefan,
>>
>> On Thursday 29 June 2017 11:15 AM, Stefan Roese wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> as you might have noticed, Bin Meng is currently greatly improving
>>> the U-Boot xHCI support. While doing this, he noticed that some
>>> additions are more complex and especially ugly to add, since some
>>> users of the xHCI support have not enabled CONFIG_DM_USB. This
>>> adds ugly #ifdef's, which we really would like to avoid. Because
>>> of this we checked, which boards exactly are using xHCI without
>>> DM_USB enabled. Here a complete list of all the boards:
>>>
>>> ls1012ardb_qspi_SECURE_BOOT
>>> ls1021atwr_nor_SECURE_BOOT
>>> am43xx_hs_evm
>>> am57xx_hs_evm
>>> ls1021aqds_nand
>>> ls1021atwr_nor
>>> ls1021atwr_qspi
>>> cm_t43
>>> ls1021atwr_nor_lpuart
>>> ls1021aqds_sdcard_qspi
>>> k2hk_hs_evm
>>> am43xx_evm
>>> ls1021aqds_qspi
>>> am57xx_evm_nodt
>>> k2g_hs_evm
>>> ls1021atwr_sdcard_qspi
>>> am43xx_evm_ethboot
>>> ls1021aqds_sdcard_ifc
>>> k2l_evm
>>> am43xx_evm_usbhost_boot
>>> am43xx_evm_qspiboot
>>> k2g_evm
>>> am57xx_evm
>>> ls1021atwr_sdcard_ifc
>>> cl-som-am57x
>>> k2hk_evm
>>> k2e_evm
>>> ls1021atwr_sdcard_ifc_SECURE_BOOT
>>> ls1021aqds_nor_SECURE_BOOT
>>> k2e_hs_evm
>>
>> For TI platforms, there is some work needed to convert xhci-dwc3,
>> xhci-omap and xhci-keystone to DM (under drivers/usb/host)
>>
>> But the bigger concern of enabling DM_USB is with gadget framework,
>> which is not DM compliant yet. There is a significant amount work[1][2]
>> there before dwc3 gadget can be moved to DM and we can enable DM_USB.
>>
>> [1]https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2017-June/296081.html
>> [2]https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2017-June/295370.html
> 
> I thought gadget and host support are separate, so host support like
> xHCI can be moved to DM without affecting gadget support, no? Are they
> sharing some codes?
> 

Right now, the assumption is if DM_USB is enabled, then both host and
gadget frameworks use DM along with DT. If, DM_USB is enabled, then
board specific registration of gadget drivers don't happen. Also, I see
couple of gadget drivers like ether.c. ci_udc.c (and everything under
musb_new) seem use DM_USB already, making it hard for DM based host and
non DM gadget to exist.

Some work would be needed to remove dependency b/w DM_USB and gadget
support.

-- 
Regards
Vignesh

[U-Boot] Targets with xHCI but without DM_USB

[Bin Meng]

+Alison and York for LS1021A_xxx boards..

On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 12:36 PM, Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com> wrote:
> Hi Bin,
>
> On Monday 03 July 2017 06:49 PM, Bin Meng wrote:
>> Hi Vignesh,
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Stefan,
>>>
>>> On Thursday 29 June 2017 11:15 AM, Stefan Roese wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> as you might have noticed, Bin Meng is currently greatly improving
>>>> the U-Boot xHCI support. While doing this, he noticed that some
>>>> additions are more complex and especially ugly to add, since some
>>>> users of the xHCI support have not enabled CONFIG_DM_USB. This
>>>> adds ugly #ifdef's, which we really would like to avoid. Because
>>>> of this we checked, which boards exactly are using xHCI without
>>>> DM_USB enabled. Here a complete list of all the boards:
>>>>
>>>> ls1012ardb_qspi_SECURE_BOOT
>>>> ls1021atwr_nor_SECURE_BOOT
>>>> am43xx_hs_evm
>>>> am57xx_hs_evm
>>>> ls1021aqds_nand
>>>> ls1021atwr_nor
>>>> ls1021atwr_qspi
>>>> cm_t43
>>>> ls1021atwr_nor_lpuart
>>>> ls1021aqds_sdcard_qspi
>>>> k2hk_hs_evm
>>>> am43xx_evm
>>>> ls1021aqds_qspi
>>>> am57xx_evm_nodt
>>>> k2g_hs_evm
>>>> ls1021atwr_sdcard_qspi
>>>> am43xx_evm_ethboot
>>>> ls1021aqds_sdcard_ifc
>>>> k2l_evm
>>>> am43xx_evm_usbhost_boot
>>>> am43xx_evm_qspiboot
>>>> k2g_evm
>>>> am57xx_evm
>>>> ls1021atwr_sdcard_ifc
>>>> cl-som-am57x
>>>> k2hk_evm
>>>> k2e_evm
>>>> ls1021atwr_sdcard_ifc_SECURE_BOOT
>>>> ls1021aqds_nor_SECURE_BOOT
>>>> k2e_hs_evm
>>>
>>> For TI platforms, there is some work needed to convert xhci-dwc3,
>>> xhci-omap and xhci-keystone to DM (under drivers/usb/host)
>>>
>>> But the bigger concern of enabling DM_USB is with gadget framework,
>>> which is not DM compliant yet. There is a significant amount work[1][2]
>>> there before dwc3 gadget can be moved to DM and we can enable DM_USB.
>>>
>>> [1]https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2017-June/296081.html
>>> [2]https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2017-June/295370.html
>>
>> I thought gadget and host support are separate, so host support like
>> xHCI can be moved to DM without affecting gadget support, no? Are they
>> sharing some codes?
>>
>
> Right now, the assumption is if DM_USB is enabled, then both host and
> gadget frameworks use DM along with DT. If, DM_USB is enabled, then
> board specific registration of gadget drivers don't happen. Also, I see
> couple of gadget drivers like ether.c. ci_udc.c (and everything under
> musb_new) seem use DM_USB already, making it hard for DM based host and
> non DM gadget to exist.
>
> Some work would be needed to remove dependency b/w DM_USB and gadget
> support.
>

Thanks for the clarification!

Regards,
Bin

[U-Boot] Targets with xHCI but without DM_USB

[Alison Wang]

Hi, Bin,

I have sent a patch to enable driver model for USB for LS1021A boards.

Thanks for reminding.

Best Regards,
Alison Wang

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bin Meng [mailto:bmeng.cn at gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2017 10:16 PM
> To: Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com>; Alison Wang <alison.wang@nxp.com>;
> York Sun <york.sun@nxp.com>
> Cc: Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de>; U-Boot list <u-boot@lists.denx.de>;
> Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>; Prabhakar Kushwaha
> <prabhakar.kushwaha@nxp.com>; Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@nxp.com>; Vutla,
> Lokesh <lokeshvutla@ti.com>; Alison Wang <alison.wang@freescale.com>;
> Nikita Kiryanov <nikita@compulab.co.il>; Davis, Andrew <afd@ti.com>;
> Andrianov, Vitaly <vitalya@ti.com>; Uri Mashiach
> <uri.mashiach@compulab.co.il>
> Subject: Re: [U-Boot] Targets with xHCI but without DM_USB
> 
> +Alison and York for LS1021A_xxx boards..
> 
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 12:36 PM, Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com> wrote:
> > Hi Bin,
> >
> > On Monday 03 July 2017 06:49 PM, Bin Meng wrote:
> >> Hi Vignesh,
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Vignesh R <vigneshr@ti.com> wrote:
> >>> Hi Stefan,
> >>>
> >>> On Thursday 29 June 2017 11:15 AM, Stefan Roese wrote:
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> as you might have noticed, Bin Meng is currently greatly improving
> >>>> the U-Boot xHCI support. While doing this, he noticed that some
> >>>> additions are more complex and especially ugly to add, since some
> >>>> users of the xHCI support have not enabled CONFIG_DM_USB. This
> adds
> >>>> ugly #ifdef's, which we really would like to avoid. Because of
> this
> >>>> we checked, which boards exactly are using xHCI without DM_USB
> >>>> enabled. Here a complete list of all the boards:
> >>>>
> >>>> ls1012ardb_qspi_SECURE_BOOT
> >>>> ls1021atwr_nor_SECURE_BOOT
> >>>> am43xx_hs_evm
> >>>> am57xx_hs_evm
> >>>> ls1021aqds_nand
> >>>> ls1021atwr_nor
> >>>> ls1021atwr_qspi
> >>>> cm_t43
> >>>> ls1021atwr_nor_lpuart
> >>>> ls1021aqds_sdcard_qspi
> >>>> k2hk_hs_evm
> >>>> am43xx_evm
> >>>> ls1021aqds_qspi
> >>>> am57xx_evm_nodt
> >>>> k2g_hs_evm
> >>>> ls1021atwr_sdcard_qspi
> >>>> am43xx_evm_ethboot
> >>>> ls1021aqds_sdcard_ifc
> >>>> k2l_evm
> >>>> am43xx_evm_usbhost_boot
> >>>> am43xx_evm_qspiboot
> >>>> k2g_evm
> >>>> am57xx_evm
> >>>> ls1021atwr_sdcard_ifc
> >>>> cl-som-am57x
> >>>> k2hk_evm
> >>>> k2e_evm
> >>>> ls1021atwr_sdcard_ifc_SECURE_BOOT
> >>>> ls1021aqds_nor_SECURE_BOOT
> >>>> k2e_hs_evm
> >>>
> >>> For TI platforms, there is some work needed to convert xhci-dwc3,
> >>> xhci-omap and xhci-keystone to DM (under drivers/usb/host)
> >>>
> >>> But the bigger concern of enabling DM_USB is with gadget framework,
> >>> which is not DM compliant yet. There is a significant amount
> >>> work[1][2] there before dwc3 gadget can be moved to DM and we can
> enable DM_USB.
> >>>
> >>> [1]https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2017-June/296081.html
> >>> [2]https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2017-June/295370.html
> >>
> >> I thought gadget and host support are separate, so host support like
> >> xHCI can be moved to DM without affecting gadget support, no? Are
> >> they sharing some codes?
> >>
> >
> > Right now, the assumption is if DM_USB is enabled, then both host and
> > gadget frameworks use DM along with DT. If, DM_USB is enabled, then
> > board specific registration of gadget drivers don't happen. Also, I
> > see couple of gadget drivers like ether.c. ci_udc.c (and everything
> > under
> > musb_new) seem use DM_USB already, making it hard for DM based host
> > and non DM gadget to exist.
> >
> > Some work would be needed to remove dependency b/w DM_USB and gadget
> > support.
> >
> 
> Thanks for the clarification!
> 
> Regards,
> Bin