| Message ID | 20130913190953.24617.46506.stgit@localhost (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Hi Tony, Both patches look good to me, though I didn't have the time to retest them. -- Cheers, Luca. On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 12:09 -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > Commit b42b9181 (ARM: OMAP2+: Remove board-omap4panda.c) > removed legacy booting in favor of device tree based booting > for pandaboard. That caused the WLAN to stop working as the > related .dts entries fell through the cracks. > > The legacy muxing was setting pulls for GPIO 48 and 49, so let's > keep that behaviour for now to avoid further regressions for > BT and FM. Also input logic was enabled for MMC CLK line, but > I've verified that the input logic we don't need enabled for > CLK line as it's not bidirectional. > > Also, we want to use non-removable instead of ti,non-removable > as the ti,non-removable also sets no_regulator_off_init which > is really not what we want as then wl12xx won't get powered > up and down which is needed for resetting it. > > Note that looks like the WLAN interface fails to come up after > a warm reset, but that most likely was also happening with > the legacy booting and needs a separate fix. > > Cc: Paolo Pisati <p.pisati@gmail.com> > Cc: Benoit Cousson <bcousson@baylibre.com> > Cc: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@ti.com> > Cc: Luciano Coelho <luca@coelho.fi> > Cc: devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org > Signed-off-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> > --- > arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-panda-common.dtsi | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-panda-common.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-panda-common.dtsi > index faa95b5..814ab67 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-panda-common.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-panda-common.dtsi > @@ -107,6 +107,19 @@ > */ > clock-frequency = <19200000>; > }; > + > + /* regulator for wl12xx on sdio5 */ > + wl12xx_vmmc: wl12xx_vmmc { > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > + pinctrl-0 = <&wl12xx_gpio>; > + compatible = "regulator-fixed"; > + regulator-name = "vwl1271"; > + regulator-min-microvolt = <1800000>; > + regulator-max-microvolt = <1800000>; > + gpio = <&gpio2 11 0>; > + startup-delay-us = <70000>; > + enable-active-high; > + }; > }; > > &omap4_pmx_wkup { > @@ -235,6 +248,33 @@ > 0x1c (PIN_OUTPUT | MUX_MODE3) /* gpio_wk8 */ > >; > }; > + > + /* > + * wl12xx GPIO outputs for WLAN_EN, BT_EN, FM_EN, BT_WAKEUP > + * REVISIT: Are the pull-ups needed for GPIO 48 and 49? > + */ > + wl12xx_gpio: pinmux_wl12xx_gpio { > + pinctrl-single,pins = < > + 0x26 (PIN_OUTPUT | MUX_MODE3) /* gpmc_a19.gpio_43 */ > + 0x2c (PIN_OUTPUT | MUX_MODE3) /* gpmc_a22.gpio_46 */ > + 0x30 (PIN_OUTPUT_PULLUP | MUX_MODE3) /* gpmc_a24.gpio_48 */ > + 0x32 (PIN_OUTPUT_PULLUP | MUX_MODE3) /* gpmc_a25.gpio_49 */ > + >; > + }; > + > + /* wl12xx GPIO inputs and SDIO pins */ > + wl12xx_pins: pinmux_wl12xx_pins { > + pinctrl-single,pins = < > + 0x38 (PIN_INPUT | MUX_MODE3) /* gpmc_ncs2.gpio_52 */ > + 0x3a (PIN_INPUT | MUX_MODE3) /* gpmc_ncs3.gpio_53 */ > + 0x108 (PIN_OUTPUT | MUX_MODE0) /* sdmmc5_clk.sdmmc5_clk */ > + 0x10a (PIN_INPUT_PULLUP | MUX_MODE0) /* sdmmc5_cmd.sdmmc5_cmd */ > + 0x10c (PIN_INPUT_PULLUP | MUX_MODE0) /* sdmmc5_dat0.sdmmc5_dat0 */ > + 0x10e (PIN_INPUT_PULLUP | MUX_MODE0) /* sdmmc5_dat1.sdmmc5_dat1 */ > + 0x110 (PIN_INPUT_PULLUP | MUX_MODE0) /* sdmmc5_dat2.sdmmc5_dat2 */ > + 0x112 (PIN_INPUT_PULLUP | MUX_MODE0) /* sdmmc5_dat3.sdmmc5_dat3 */ > + >; > + }; > }; > > &i2c1 { > @@ -314,8 +354,12 @@ > }; > > &mmc5 { > - ti,non-removable; > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > + pinctrl-0 = <&wl12xx_pins>; > + vmmc-supply = <&wl12xx_vmmc>; > + non-removable; > bus-width = <4>; > + cap-power-off-card; > }; > > &emif1 { >
On Tue, 2013-09-17 at 09:26 +0300, Luca Coelho wrote: > Both patches look good to me, though I didn't have the time to retest > them. Actually I don't even have a Blaze device anymore, so I can't really test the second patch. :( -- Luca.
* Luca Coelho <luca@coelho.fi> [130916 23:35]: > On Tue, 2013-09-17 at 09:26 +0300, Luca Coelho wrote: > > Both patches look good to me, though I didn't have the time to retest > > them. > > Actually I don't even have a Blaze device anymore, so I can't really > test the second patch. :( OK no problem, I've tested it on panda es. Regards, Tony
Hi Tony, On 18/09/2013 02:02, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Luca Coelho <luca@coelho.fi> [130916 23:35]: >> On Tue, 2013-09-17 at 09:26 +0300, Luca Coelho wrote: >>> Both patches look good to me, though I didn't have the time to retest >>> them. >> >> Actually I don't even have a Blaze device anymore, so I can't really >> test the second patch. :( > > OK no problem, I've tested it on panda es. Do we have someone out-there that still own a Blaze? Anyway, I'm about to send a DTS fix branch for -rc2, so I'll include these two patches. Thanks, Benoit
* Benoit Cousson <bcousson@baylibre.com> [130918 02:12]: > Hi Tony, > > On 18/09/2013 02:02, Tony Lindgren wrote: > >* Luca Coelho <luca@coelho.fi> [130916 23:35]: > >>On Tue, 2013-09-17 at 09:26 +0300, Luca Coelho wrote: > >>>Both patches look good to me, though I didn't have the time to retest > >>>them. > >> > >>Actually I don't even have a Blaze device anymore, so I can't really > >>test the second patch. :( > > > >OK no problem, I've tested it on panda es. > > Do we have someone out-there that still own a Blaze? > > Anyway, I'm about to send a DTS fix branch for -rc2, so I'll include > these two patches. OK yes good please do pick them up, I'll drop them from my not-yet-pushed-out omap-for-v3.12/fixes. Regards, Tony
* Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> [130918 11:00]: > * Benoit Cousson <bcousson@baylibre.com> [130918 02:12]: > > Hi Tony, > > > > On 18/09/2013 02:02, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > >* Luca Coelho <luca@coelho.fi> [130916 23:35]: > > >>On Tue, 2013-09-17 at 09:26 +0300, Luca Coelho wrote: > > >>>Both patches look good to me, though I didn't have the time to retest > > >>>them. > > >> > > >>Actually I don't even have a Blaze device anymore, so I can't really > > >>test the second patch. :( > > > > > >OK no problem, I've tested it on panda es. > > > > Do we have someone out-there that still own a Blaze? > > > > Anyway, I'm about to send a DTS fix branch for -rc2, so I'll include > > these two patches. > > OK yes good please do pick them up, I'll drop them from my > not-yet-pushed-out omap-for-v3.12/fixes. Hmm looks like there's also some new regression in the wl12xx driver: # iwconfig wlan0 wlan0 no wireless extensions. My test script was just doing: # iw dev wlan0 scan And that works fine. Luca, any ideas? Regards, Tony
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 2:04 AM, Benoit Cousson <bcousson@baylibre.com> wrote: > Hi Tony, > > > On 18/09/2013 02:02, Tony Lindgren wrote: >> >> * Luca Coelho <luca@coelho.fi> [130916 23:35]: >>> >>> On Tue, 2013-09-17 at 09:26 +0300, Luca Coelho wrote: >>>> >>>> Both patches look good to me, though I didn't have the time to retest >>>> them. >>> >>> >>> Actually I don't even have a Blaze device anymore, so I can't really >>> test the second patch. :( >> >> >> OK no problem, I've tested it on panda es. > > > Do we have someone out-there that still own a Blaze? I think I might have one in a box somewhere. I'll take a look. -Olof
On Wed, 2013-09-18 at 16:47 -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> [130918 11:00]: > > * Benoit Cousson <bcousson@baylibre.com> [130918 02:12]: > > > Hi Tony, > > > > > > On 18/09/2013 02:02, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > >* Luca Coelho <luca@coelho.fi> [130916 23:35]: > > > >>On Tue, 2013-09-17 at 09:26 +0300, Luca Coelho wrote: > > > >>>Both patches look good to me, though I didn't have the time to retest > > > >>>them. > > > >> > > > >>Actually I don't even have a Blaze device anymore, so I can't really > > > >>test the second patch. :( > > > > > > > >OK no problem, I've tested it on panda es. > > > > > > Do we have someone out-there that still own a Blaze? > > > > > > Anyway, I'm about to send a DTS fix branch for -rc2, so I'll include > > > these two patches. > > > > OK yes good please do pick them up, I'll drop them from my > > not-yet-pushed-out omap-for-v3.12/fixes. > > Hmm looks like there's also some new regression in the > wl12xx driver: > > # iwconfig wlan0 > wlan0 no wireless extensions. > > My test script was just doing: > > # iw dev wlan0 scan > > And that works fine. Luca, any ideas? Have you compiled WEXT support in your kernel? iwconfig uses the (deprecated) Wireless Extensions API. iw uses the current nl80211 API. If you want to use iwconfig and friends you need to enable CONFIG_CFG80211_WEXT. -- Cheers, Luca.
* Luca Coelho <luca@coelho.fi> [130918 22:50]: > On Wed, 2013-09-18 at 16:47 -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > * Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> [130918 11:00]: > > > * Benoit Cousson <bcousson@baylibre.com> [130918 02:12]: > > > > Hi Tony, > > > > > > > > On 18/09/2013 02:02, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > > >* Luca Coelho <luca@coelho.fi> [130916 23:35]: > > > > >>On Tue, 2013-09-17 at 09:26 +0300, Luca Coelho wrote: > > > > >>>Both patches look good to me, though I didn't have the time to retest > > > > >>>them. > > > > >> > > > > >>Actually I don't even have a Blaze device anymore, so I can't really > > > > >>test the second patch. :( > > > > > > > > > >OK no problem, I've tested it on panda es. > > > > > > > > Do we have someone out-there that still own a Blaze? > > > > > > > > Anyway, I'm about to send a DTS fix branch for -rc2, so I'll include > > > > these two patches. > > > > > > OK yes good please do pick them up, I'll drop them from my > > > not-yet-pushed-out omap-for-v3.12/fixes. > > > > Hmm looks like there's also some new regression in the > > wl12xx driver: > > > > # iwconfig wlan0 > > wlan0 no wireless extensions. > > > > My test script was just doing: > > > > # iw dev wlan0 scan > > > > And that works fine. Luca, any ideas? > > Have you compiled WEXT support in your kernel? iwconfig uses the > (deprecated) Wireless Extensions API. iw uses the current nl80211 API. > > If you want to use iwconfig and friends you need to enable > CONFIG_CFG80211_WEXT. OK thanks, I don't need to use iwconfig. Looks like the default changed in commit 10bab00af (cfg80211: deprecate CFG80211_WEXT). Regards, Tony
On Thu, 2013-09-19 at 07:53 -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Luca Coelho <luca@coelho.fi> [130918 22:50]: > > On Wed, 2013-09-18 at 16:47 -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > * Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> [130918 11:00]: > > > > * Benoit Cousson <bcousson@baylibre.com> [130918 02:12]: > > > > > Hi Tony, > > > > > > > > > > On 18/09/2013 02:02, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > > > >* Luca Coelho <luca@coelho.fi> [130916 23:35]: > > > > > >>On Tue, 2013-09-17 at 09:26 +0300, Luca Coelho wrote: > > > > > >>>Both patches look good to me, though I didn't have the time to retest > > > > > >>>them. > > > > > >> > > > > > >>Actually I don't even have a Blaze device anymore, so I can't really > > > > > >>test the second patch. :( > > > > > > > > > > > >OK no problem, I've tested it on panda es. > > > > > > > > > > Do we have someone out-there that still own a Blaze? > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, I'm about to send a DTS fix branch for -rc2, so I'll include > > > > > these two patches. > > > > > > > > OK yes good please do pick them up, I'll drop them from my > > > > not-yet-pushed-out omap-for-v3.12/fixes. > > > > > > Hmm looks like there's also some new regression in the > > > wl12xx driver: > > > > > > # iwconfig wlan0 > > > wlan0 no wireless extensions. > > > > > > My test script was just doing: > > > > > > # iw dev wlan0 scan > > > > > > And that works fine. Luca, any ideas? > > > > Have you compiled WEXT support in your kernel? iwconfig uses the > > (deprecated) Wireless Extensions API. iw uses the current nl80211 API. > > > > If you want to use iwconfig and friends you need to enable > > CONFIG_CFG80211_WEXT. > > OK thanks, I don't need to use iwconfig. Looks like the default > changed in commit 10bab00af (cfg80211: deprecate CFG80211_WEXT). Yeah, it's not enabled by default anymore. And it was more than about time! ;) -- Luca.
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-panda-common.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-panda-common.dtsi index faa95b5..814ab67 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-panda-common.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-panda-common.dtsi @@ -107,6 +107,19 @@ */ clock-frequency = <19200000>; }; + + /* regulator for wl12xx on sdio5 */ + wl12xx_vmmc: wl12xx_vmmc { + pinctrl-names = "default"; + pinctrl-0 = <&wl12xx_gpio>; + compatible = "regulator-fixed"; + regulator-name = "vwl1271"; + regulator-min-microvolt = <1800000>; + regulator-max-microvolt = <1800000>; + gpio = <&gpio2 11 0>; + startup-delay-us = <70000>; + enable-active-high; + }; }; &omap4_pmx_wkup { @@ -235,6 +248,33 @@ 0x1c (PIN_OUTPUT | MUX_MODE3) /* gpio_wk8 */ >; }; + + /* + * wl12xx GPIO outputs for WLAN_EN, BT_EN, FM_EN, BT_WAKEUP + * REVISIT: Are the pull-ups needed for GPIO 48 and 49? + */ + wl12xx_gpio: pinmux_wl12xx_gpio { + pinctrl-single,pins = < + 0x26 (PIN_OUTPUT | MUX_MODE3) /* gpmc_a19.gpio_43 */ + 0x2c (PIN_OUTPUT | MUX_MODE3) /* gpmc_a22.gpio_46 */ + 0x30 (PIN_OUTPUT_PULLUP | MUX_MODE3) /* gpmc_a24.gpio_48 */ + 0x32 (PIN_OUTPUT_PULLUP | MUX_MODE3) /* gpmc_a25.gpio_49 */ + >; + }; + + /* wl12xx GPIO inputs and SDIO pins */ + wl12xx_pins: pinmux_wl12xx_pins { + pinctrl-single,pins = < + 0x38 (PIN_INPUT | MUX_MODE3) /* gpmc_ncs2.gpio_52 */ + 0x3a (PIN_INPUT | MUX_MODE3) /* gpmc_ncs3.gpio_53 */ + 0x108 (PIN_OUTPUT | MUX_MODE0) /* sdmmc5_clk.sdmmc5_clk */ + 0x10a (PIN_INPUT_PULLUP | MUX_MODE0) /* sdmmc5_cmd.sdmmc5_cmd */ + 0x10c (PIN_INPUT_PULLUP | MUX_MODE0) /* sdmmc5_dat0.sdmmc5_dat0 */ + 0x10e (PIN_INPUT_PULLUP | MUX_MODE0) /* sdmmc5_dat1.sdmmc5_dat1 */ + 0x110 (PIN_INPUT_PULLUP | MUX_MODE0) /* sdmmc5_dat2.sdmmc5_dat2 */ + 0x112 (PIN_INPUT_PULLUP | MUX_MODE0) /* sdmmc5_dat3.sdmmc5_dat3 */ + >; + }; }; &i2c1 { @@ -314,8 +354,12 @@ }; &mmc5 { - ti,non-removable; + pinctrl-names = "default"; + pinctrl-0 = <&wl12xx_pins>; + vmmc-supply = <&wl12xx_vmmc>; + non-removable; bus-width = <4>; + cap-power-off-card; }; &emif1 {
Commit b42b9181 (ARM: OMAP2+: Remove board-omap4panda.c) removed legacy booting in favor of device tree based booting for pandaboard. That caused the WLAN to stop working as the related .dts entries fell through the cracks. The legacy muxing was setting pulls for GPIO 48 and 49, so let's keep that behaviour for now to avoid further regressions for BT and FM. Also input logic was enabled for MMC CLK line, but I've verified that the input logic we don't need enabled for CLK line as it's not bidirectional. Also, we want to use non-removable instead of ti,non-removable as the ti,non-removable also sets no_regulator_off_init which is really not what we want as then wl12xx won't get powered up and down which is needed for resetting it. Note that looks like the WLAN interface fails to come up after a warm reset, but that most likely was also happening with the legacy booting and needs a separate fix. Cc: Paolo Pisati <p.pisati@gmail.com> Cc: Benoit Cousson <bcousson@baylibre.com> Cc: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@ti.com> Cc: Luciano Coelho <luca@coelho.fi> Cc: devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org Signed-off-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> --- arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-panda-common.dtsi | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)