RE: 440gx GPIO

2 messages, 2 authors, 2006-02-20 · open the first message on its own page

RE: 440gx GPIO

From: Howard, Marc <hidden>
Date: 2006-02-15 00:20:35

-----Original Message-----
From:=20
linuxppc-embedded-bounces+marc.howard=3Dkla-tencor.com@ozlabs.or
g=20
[mailto:linuxppc-embedded-bounces+marc.howard=3Dkla-tencor.com@o
zlabs.org] On Behalf Of Ed Goforth
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 1:47 PM
To: linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: 440gx GPIO
.....=20
Well, I was able to manipulate GPIO9, GPIO10 and GPIO12.  It's time to
turn it over to the hardware people.
=20
It's AMCC's fault.  They aren't listing the latest errata on their
website.  I downloaded their rev 3.1 ver 1.03 errata last August.
However if you look today you get the rev 3.1 ver 1.02 release.

In the 1.03 errata there is the following bug listed:

*************

GPIO_1:SDR0_PFC[G11E] has no effect.
Category: 6
Overview:
The SDR0_PFC[G11E] bit does not control GPIO11, thus meaning that GPIO11
is always active (unless EMAC group 4 is selected and both GPHYs are in
modes 0 or 1).
  =20
Impact:No impact.
Workaround:
None.

**************

Thus the PFC bit doesn't do anything.  If you're using group 4 "modes 0
or 1" (which mode field are they talking about here?) you're screwed,
you can't use GPIO11.

Curious how they think this has "No impact".  If you're running RGMII
you don't need that pin and it should be available for GPIO11 but
apparently it isn't.

Marc

Re: 440gx GPIO

From: Ed Goforth <hidden>
Date: 2006-02-20 17:13:14

On 2/14/06, Howard, Marc [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
-----Original Message-----
From:
linuxppc-embedded-bounces+marc.howard=3Dkla-tencor.com@ozlabs.or
g
[mailto:linuxppc-embedded-bounces+marc.howard=3Dkla-tencor.com@o
zlabs.org] On Behalf Of Ed Goforth
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 1:47 PM
To: linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: 440gx GPIO
.....
Well, I was able to manipulate GPIO9, GPIO10 and GPIO12.  It's time to
turn it over to the hardware people.
It's AMCC's fault.  They aren't listing the latest errata on their
website.  I downloaded their rev 3.1 ver 1.03 errata last August.
However if you look today you get the rev 3.1 ver 1.02 release.
Do you recall if this errata is only against rev 3.1 chips?  We are
currently using rev 2.1 (PVR ending in 892), but will be doing some
hardware refreshes sometime.
Marc
Thanks,
Ed
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help