[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 at 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 at 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