All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>
To: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
	Michel Stempin <michel.stempin@wanadoo.fr>
Subject: Re: [RESEND][PATCH] mtd: chips: Add support for PMC SPI Flash chips in m25p80.c
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 00:59:03 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130821075903.GC31788@brian-ubuntu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201308210941.38483.marex@denx.de>

On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 09:41:38AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Brian Norris,
> 
> > + Marek, since he's been reviewing (with dismay?) the increase in macro
> > flags in this driver. If there are any objections, I can amend/drop the
> > patch.
> 
> Hmmm ... this SECT_4K_PMC seems too combined to me. Why don't we use the SECT_4K 
> flag and another flag to indicate it's a PMC part? Even better, I recall you can 

Separating manufacturer from SECT_4K sounds good, but it really doesn't
buy us much. See my next comments.

> just read the chip jedec ID and determine if it's a PMC part according to that. 
> Then if it is PMC AND the SECT_4K flag is set, there is no need to add another 
> flag at all, no?

IIUC, Michel's comment applies:

  "They do not support JEDEC RDID (0x9f), and so they can only be
  detected by matching their name string with pre-configured platform
  data."

So we cannot use RDID to identify by manufacturer. In fact, this same
point screws up any attempt at manufacturer-based property detection for
non-JEDEC devices. I guess we just can't expect much from such devices.

So we would have to introduce two flags to the table: one to flag the
manufacturer and one to flag the opcode. Not necessary, IMO.

> > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 12:13:56PM +0200, Michel Stempin wrote:

[...]

> > > @@ -762,6 +764,11 @@ static const struct spi_device_id m25p_ids[] = {
> > > 
> > >  	{ "n25q128a13",  INFO(0x20ba18, 0, 64 * 1024, 256, 0) },
> > >  	{ "n25q256a", INFO(0x20ba19, 0, 64 * 1024, 512, SECT_4K) },
> > > 
> > > +	/* PMC */
> > > +	{ "pm25lv512", INFO(0, 0, 32 * 1024, 2, SECT_4K_PMC) },
> > > +	{ "pm25lv010", INFO(0, 0, 32 * 1024, 4, SECT_4K_PMC) },

Note that only the non-JEDEC chips needed the old commands.

> > > +	{ "pm25lq032", INFO(0x7f9d46, 0, 64 * 1024,  64, SECT_4K) },
> > > +
> > > 
> > >  	/* Spansion -- single (large) sector size only, at least
> > >  	
> > >  	 * for the chips listed here (without boot sectors).
> > >  	 */
> > > 

Brian

  reply	other threads:[~2013-08-21  7:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-07-15 10:13 [RESEND][PATCH] mtd: chips: Add support for PMC SPI Flash chips in m25p80.c Michel Stempin
2013-08-21  7:27 ` Brian Norris
2013-08-21  7:41   ` Marek Vasut
2013-08-21  7:59     ` Brian Norris [this message]
2013-08-21  8:07       ` Marek Vasut
2013-08-21  8:30         ` Brian Norris
2013-08-21 13:10           ` Marek Vasut
2013-08-21 19:47             ` Brian Norris

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20130821075903.GC31788@brian-ubuntu \
    --to=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=marex@denx.de \
    --cc=michel.stempin@wanadoo.fr \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.