[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121114153348.GA32208@avionic-0098.mockup.avionic-design.de>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 16:33:48 +0100
From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...onic-design.de>
To: Terje Bergström <tbergstrom@...dia.com>
Cc: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
"linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: tegra: Add Tegra20 host1x support
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 05:29:33PM +0200, Terje Bergström wrote:
> On 14.11.2012 17:01, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > Funny. I just tested with this line removed and I also get the freeze.
> > With the line I don't get the freeze. Does the freeze only occur with
> > additional patches on top? If so I think we should keep the line in for
> > now because it is what most people have tested against and which has
> > proven to work. We can fix any remaining issues with host1x specific
> > things when actual patches emerge.
>
> I was running with 2D acceleration support added on top of your
> gitorious tree. It was the nvhost driver, which probes host1x, and
> initializes it. In middle of initialization (writing zeros to sync point
> registers), host1x stops responding.
>
> I agree, if removing the line causes regression, keep it and let's debug
> this issue later.
>
> It might be that we have a difference in bootloader. Does your
> bootloader enable display? U-Boot and fastboot do, and it might be that
> has an effect. They would need to initialize host1x clocks, and it might
> be that kernel initialization somehow clashes with bootloader's.
I use an upstream U-Boot version that performs no display initialization
on the board that I use. Perhaps that indeed causes your setup to work
properly but not mine.
Thierry
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists