[PATCH] ENGR00121057 switch low power mode only support in mc13892 2.0a
Stefan Bader
stefan.bader at canonical.com
Wed Aug 11 15:44:57 UTC 2010
On 08/11/2010 04:17 PM, Vaidyanathan Ranjani-RA5478 wrote:
> Hi all,
> I have attached the email that I sent to Bryan Wu on 08/09/2010. I did
> verify Bryan's kernel that included the patch mentioned below on 2
> BBG2.5 boards (that have Atlas 2.0 parts). I followed the steps
> mentioned in the attached email to upgrade the kernel and the 2 BBG2.5
> boards booted fine after the kernel upgrade.
>
> Amit,
> I am sorry, apart from replacing the MX51 and/or the atlas part, I
> don't believe there is a way to "unbrick" the broken boards.
>
> Thanks,
> Ranjani
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bryan Wu [mailto:bryan.wu at canonical.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 8:34 AM
> To: Stefan Bader; Amit Kucheria; Vaidyanathan Ranjani-RA5478
> Cc: kernel-team at lists.ubuntu.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] ENGR00121057 switch low power mode only support in
> mc13892 2.0a
>
> On 08/11/2010 08:37 PM, Stefan Bader wrote:
>> On 08/11/2010 01:56 PM, Amit Kucheria wrote:
>>> On 10 Aug 11, Stefan Bader wrote:
>>>> On 08/11/2010 12:41 PM, Bryan Wu wrote:
>>>>> On 08/10/2010 11:36 PM, Brad Figg wrote:
>>>>>> On 08/10/2010 12:07 AM, Bryan Wu wrote:
>>>>>>> From: Shen Yong<b00984 at freescale.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> switch low power mode will cause problems on previous version of
>>>>>>> mc13892, which may break mc13892 chip.
>>>>>>> This is a fix for ENGR00120510.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BugLink: http://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/615722
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Shen Yong<b00984 at freescale.com>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Bryan Wu<bryan.wu at canonical.com>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> arch/arm/mach-mx51/mx51_babbage_pmic_mc13892.c | 30
> +++++++++++++++--------
>>>>>>> 1 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-mx51/mx51_babbage_pmic_mc13892.c
>>>>>>> b/arch/arm/mach-mx51/mx51_babbage_pmic_mc13892.c
>>>>>>> index e8a03cf..13869d0 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-mx51/mx51_babbage_pmic_mc13892.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-mx51/mx51_babbage_pmic_mc13892.c
>>>>>>> @@ -346,17 +346,25 @@ static int mc13892_regulator_init(struct
> mc13892 *mc13892)
>>>>>>> pmic_write_reg(REG_MODE_1, value, 0xffffff);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /* enable switch audo mode */
>>>>>>> - pmic_read_reg(REG_SW_4,&value, 0xffffff);
>>>>>>> - register_mask = (SWMODE_MASK<< SW1MODE_LSB) |
> (SWMODE_MASK<< SW2MODE_LSB);
>>>>>>> - value&= ~register_mask;
>>>>>>> - value |= (SWMODE_AUTO<< SW1MODE_LSB) | (SWMODE_AUTO<<
> SW2MODE_LSB);
>>>>>>> - pmic_write_reg(REG_SW_4, value, 0xffffff);
>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>> - pmic_read_reg(REG_SW_5,&value, 0xffffff);
>>>>>>> - register_mask = (SWMODE_MASK<< SW3MODE_LSB) |
> (SWMODE_MASK<< SW4MODE_LSB);
>>>>>>> - value&= ~register_mask;
>>>>>>> - value |= (SWMODE_AUTO<< SW3MODE_LSB) | (SWMODE_AUTO<<
> SW4MODE_LSB);
>>>>>>> - pmic_write_reg(REG_SW_5, value, 0xffffff);
>>>>>>> + pmic_read_reg(REG_IDENTIFICATION,&value, 0xffffff);
>>>>>>> + /* only for mc13892 2.0A */
>>>>>>> + if ((value& 0x0000FFFF) == 0x45d0) {
>>>>>>> + pmic_read_reg(REG_SW_4,&value, 0xffffff);
>>>>>>> + register_mask = (SWMODE_MASK<< SW1MODE_LSB) |
>>>>>>> + (SWMODE_MASK<< SW2MODE_LSB);
>>>>>>> + value&= ~register_mask;
>>>>>>> + value |= (SWMODE_AUTO<< SW1MODE_LSB) |
>>>>>>> + (SWMODE_AUTO<< SW2MODE_LSB);
>>>>>>> + pmic_write_reg(REG_SW_4, value, 0xffffff);
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> + pmic_read_reg(REG_SW_5,&value, 0xffffff);
>>>>>>> + register_mask = (SWMODE_MASK<< SW3MODE_LSB) |
>>>>>>> + (SWMODE_MASK<< SW4MODE_LSB);
>>>>>>> + value&= ~register_mask;
>>>>>>> + value |= (SWMODE_AUTO<< SW3MODE_LSB) |
>>>>>>> + (SWMODE_AUTO<< SW4MODE_LSB);
>>>>>>> + pmic_write_reg(REG_SW_5, value, 0xffffff);
>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /* Enable coin cell charger */
>>>>>>> value = BITFVAL(CIONCHEN, 1) | BITFVAL(VCOIN,
> VCOIN_3_0V);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bryan,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you have positive test results from testing this patch? We want
>
>>>>>> to make sure this patch fixes the issue that we have been seeing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Brad,
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah, it can be confirmed by Ranjani from Freescale. I copied him
>>>>> in this email thread.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> OK, so this sounds like we can take it. ACK
>>>
>>> I think Bryan meant we should wait for confirmation from Ranjani.
>>> _She_ will confirm if this fix doesn't brick BB2.5.
>>>
>>> BTW, is there any chance of unbricking bricked BB2.5 (like mine)?
>>>
>>> /Amit
>>>
>>
>> Ok, then I hold of with that until this has been confirmed. I have an
>> updated tree ready to push and a source package ready for upload here.
>>
>
> Amit and Stefan,
>
> Actually, I sent out this patch after I got the confirmation from
> Ranjani via email.
>
> Ranjani,
>
> Could you please confirm it in public here? Sorry for treating you as a
> boy/man, -;)
>
> Thanks,
> -Bryan
>
Applied, pushed and uploaded (build will be blocked until point release is done).
Thanks all.
Stefan
More information about the kernel-team
mailing list