[Letux-kernel] 2016.11 uboot considered harmful

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

Hi,

> Am 01.02.2017 um 22:57 schrieb Andreas Kemnade <andreas at kemnade.info>:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> after some more clock hacking here is a short resume:
> Starting with a correctly set clock (maybe using hwclock --systohc from
> a running kernel) and then shutdown
> 
> you can read clock in uboot by
> i2c dev 0
> i2c mw 0x4b 0x29 0x41 1
> i2c md 0x4b 0x1c 6
> It will read out in bcd.
> ss mm hh DD MM YY
> 
> If the values are sane and you boot the kernel, clock can be read out
> correctly there.
> 
> Entering 2016.11 uboot gives a value
>> 23 for hours (I have the suspicion it is a fixed offset.)
> If you fix the hour value by hand
> (i2c mw 0x4b 0x1e 0xXX 1
>  i2c mw 0x4b 0x29 0x41 1)
> the kernel will have the correct value.
> 
> If not, after some time in the boot process the clock will be set to
> 2066.
> 
> Entering old uboot keeps the hours correctly.
> -> kernel has also correct time
> 
> If you you enter poweroff at uboot cmdline,
> and restart 2016.11 you will also have garbled hour value in the
> rtc. So no kernel is needed to harm the clock.

Ok, that can help us to focus much more on the issues.

> 
> having power loss for a short time does not influence anything.
> 
> I am very puzzled about this because I do not find twl rtc code in the
> new uboot. So some register definitions might be mixed up. Any hints?

Well, can you add some printf() to twl4030_i2c_write_u8 in include/twl4030.h?
I hope that no code is directly writing.

Hm. I have another idea what it could be:

if the i2c bus is wrongly selected some driver for a different chip might
write to the twl4030. That is because u-boot multi-i2c has to switch explicitly
between busses and switch back. We do that for example in tsc2007_init
through i2c_set_bus_num().

What I am not sure is if all our gta04 extensions properly switch back to
the bus_num they found before. So running some of our extended commands
(e.g. tsc2007) might address the wrong bus *afterwards*.

Now let's look into i2c slave address overlap.

RTC belongs to "Address Group—4b" in i2c1. Do we have and program a device
at the same address on a different i2c bus? No :(

But we have an overlap at address 0x48 which might still make the tsc2007
driver change registers in the twl4030...

So it might be better to add a printf() to i2c_write and make it print the
bus_num, the chip address, and data length. Or we restrict the printf to
bus_num=i2c1. This might show something unexpected.

BR,
Nikolaus

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.goldelico.com/pipermail/letux-kernel/attachments/20170202/c7cb4f62/attachment-0001.asc>