From: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>
To: William Zhang <william.zhang@broadcom.com>
Cc: David Regan <dregan@broadcom.com>,
dregan@mail.com, miquel.raynal@bootlin.com, richard@nod.at,
vigneshr@ti.com, robh+dt@kernel.org,
krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, conor+dt@kernel.org,
computersforpeace@gmail.com, kdasu.kdev@gmail.com,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, joel.peshkin@broadcom.com,
tomer.yacoby@broadcom.com, dan.beygelman@broadcom.com,
anand.gore@broadcom.com, kursad.oney@broadcom.com,
florian.fainelli@broadcom.com, rafal@milecki.pl,
bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com, andre.przywara@arm.com,
baruch@tkos.co.il, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
dan.carpenter@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/10] dt-bindings: mtd: brcmnand: Updates for bcmbca SoCs
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 16:46:46 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240126-armadillo-clean-e3509ed23ed5@spud> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b2bc0948-7039-4dbd-8152-08a51e744c59@broadcom.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3958 bytes --]
On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 05:55:29PM -0800, William Zhang wrote:
> On 1/25/24 11:51, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 07:01:48PM -0800, William Zhang wrote:
> > > On 1/24/24 09:24, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 07:04:49PM -0800, David Regan wrote:
> > > > > From: William Zhang <william.zhang@broadcom.com>
> > > And the reason I keep it as int is because there could be a potential value
> > > of 2 for another mode that the current driver could set the wp_on to.
> >
> > Can you explain, in driver independent terms, what this other mode has
> > to do with how the WP is connected?
> > Either you've got the standard scenario where apparently "NAND_WPb" and
> > "WP_L" are connected and another situation where they are not.
> > Is there another pin configuration in addition to that, that this 3rd
> > mode represents?
> >
> The 3rd mode is WP pin connected but wp feature is disabled in the
> controller.
What does "disabled" mean? The controller itself is not capable of using
the WP pin because of hardware modifications? Or there's a bit in a
register that disables it and that bit has been set by software?
If it is a hardware difference for that controller, why does it not have
a dedicated compatible? If it's a software decision, then it shouldn't
be in the DT in the first place ;)
We've gone back here a bunch trying to figure stuff out, and you give me
a vague one sentence answer. Please.
> > > I
> > > don't see it is being used in BCMBCA product but I am not sure about other
> > > SoC family. So I don't want to completely close the door here just in case.
> >
> > If you ever need it, you could have a "brcm,wp-in-wacky-configuration"
> > property that indicates that the hardware is configured in that way
> > (providing that this hardware configuration is not just "NAND_WPb" and
> > "WP_L" pins connected. The property can very easily be made mutually
> > exclusive with "brcm,wp-not-connected" iff it ever comes to be.
> Yes we could have a new property but if we can have a single int property to
> cover all, IMHO it is better to just have one property as these three modes
> are related. I would really like to have it as an int property to keep
> things simple.
It is "better" because it is easier for you perhaps, but ripe for abuse.
> But if you think this is absolutely against the dts rule, I will switch to
> the "brcm,wp-not-connected" boolean property as you suggested.
I'll answer this when you describe the mode better, right now I cannot
really comment, but I have not yet seen a justification for the non-flag
version of the property. Even if there's a justification for documenting
that other mode in the DT, I'm likely to still think boolean properties
are a better fit.
> > > > > If ecc
> > > > > + strength and spare area size are set by nand-ecc-strength
> > > > > + and brcm,nand-oob-sector-size in the dts, these settings
> > > > > + have precedence and override this flag.
> > > >
> > > > Again, IMO, this is not for the binding to decide. That is a decision
> > > > for the operating system to make.
> > > >
> > > Again this is just for historic reason and BCMBCA as late player does not
> > > want to break any existing dts setting. So I thought it is useful to
> > > explain here. I can remove this text if you don't think it should be in the
> > > binding document.
> >
> > I don't, at least not in that form. I think it is reasonable to explain
> > why these values are better though.
> I understand the decision is for OS/driver to make. If we were to write
> another driver for other OS, the same precedence will apply too so the
> binding works the same way across all the OS. So I am not sure what better
> explanation or form I can put up here. I am open to any suggestion or I just
> delete it.
I would just delete it tbh.
Thanks,
Conor.
[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 144 bytes --]
______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>
To: William Zhang <william.zhang@broadcom.com>
Cc: David Regan <dregan@broadcom.com>,
dregan@mail.com, miquel.raynal@bootlin.com, richard@nod.at,
vigneshr@ti.com, robh+dt@kernel.org,
krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, conor+dt@kernel.org,
computersforpeace@gmail.com, kdasu.kdev@gmail.com,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, joel.peshkin@broadcom.com,
tomer.yacoby@broadcom.com, dan.beygelman@broadcom.com,
anand.gore@broadcom.com, kursad.oney@broadcom.com,
florian.fainelli@broadcom.com, rafal@milecki.pl,
bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com, andre.przywara@arm.com,
baruch@tkos.co.il, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
dan.carpenter@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/10] dt-bindings: mtd: brcmnand: Updates for bcmbca SoCs
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 16:46:46 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240126-armadillo-clean-e3509ed23ed5@spud> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b2bc0948-7039-4dbd-8152-08a51e744c59@broadcom.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3958 bytes --]
On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 05:55:29PM -0800, William Zhang wrote:
> On 1/25/24 11:51, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 07:01:48PM -0800, William Zhang wrote:
> > > On 1/24/24 09:24, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 07:04:49PM -0800, David Regan wrote:
> > > > > From: William Zhang <william.zhang@broadcom.com>
> > > And the reason I keep it as int is because there could be a potential value
> > > of 2 for another mode that the current driver could set the wp_on to.
> >
> > Can you explain, in driver independent terms, what this other mode has
> > to do with how the WP is connected?
> > Either you've got the standard scenario where apparently "NAND_WPb" and
> > "WP_L" are connected and another situation where they are not.
> > Is there another pin configuration in addition to that, that this 3rd
> > mode represents?
> >
> The 3rd mode is WP pin connected but wp feature is disabled in the
> controller.
What does "disabled" mean? The controller itself is not capable of using
the WP pin because of hardware modifications? Or there's a bit in a
register that disables it and that bit has been set by software?
If it is a hardware difference for that controller, why does it not have
a dedicated compatible? If it's a software decision, then it shouldn't
be in the DT in the first place ;)
We've gone back here a bunch trying to figure stuff out, and you give me
a vague one sentence answer. Please.
> > > I
> > > don't see it is being used in BCMBCA product but I am not sure about other
> > > SoC family. So I don't want to completely close the door here just in case.
> >
> > If you ever need it, you could have a "brcm,wp-in-wacky-configuration"
> > property that indicates that the hardware is configured in that way
> > (providing that this hardware configuration is not just "NAND_WPb" and
> > "WP_L" pins connected. The property can very easily be made mutually
> > exclusive with "brcm,wp-not-connected" iff it ever comes to be.
> Yes we could have a new property but if we can have a single int property to
> cover all, IMHO it is better to just have one property as these three modes
> are related. I would really like to have it as an int property to keep
> things simple.
It is "better" because it is easier for you perhaps, but ripe for abuse.
> But if you think this is absolutely against the dts rule, I will switch to
> the "brcm,wp-not-connected" boolean property as you suggested.
I'll answer this when you describe the mode better, right now I cannot
really comment, but I have not yet seen a justification for the non-flag
version of the property. Even if there's a justification for documenting
that other mode in the DT, I'm likely to still think boolean properties
are a better fit.
> > > > > If ecc
> > > > > + strength and spare area size are set by nand-ecc-strength
> > > > > + and brcm,nand-oob-sector-size in the dts, these settings
> > > > > + have precedence and override this flag.
> > > >
> > > > Again, IMO, this is not for the binding to decide. That is a decision
> > > > for the operating system to make.
> > > >
> > > Again this is just for historic reason and BCMBCA as late player does not
> > > want to break any existing dts setting. So I thought it is useful to
> > > explain here. I can remove this text if you don't think it should be in the
> > > binding document.
> >
> > I don't, at least not in that form. I think it is reasonable to explain
> > why these values are better though.
> I understand the decision is for OS/driver to make. If we were to write
> another driver for other OS, the same precedence will apply too so the
> binding works the same way across all the OS. So I am not sure what better
> explanation or form I can put up here. I am open to any suggestion or I just
> delete it.
I would just delete it tbh.
Thanks,
Conor.
[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 176 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>
To: William Zhang <william.zhang@broadcom.com>
Cc: David Regan <dregan@broadcom.com>,
dregan@mail.com, miquel.raynal@bootlin.com, richard@nod.at,
vigneshr@ti.com, robh+dt@kernel.org,
krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, conor+dt@kernel.org,
computersforpeace@gmail.com, kdasu.kdev@gmail.com,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, joel.peshkin@broadcom.com,
tomer.yacoby@broadcom.com, dan.beygelman@broadcom.com,
anand.gore@broadcom.com, kursad.oney@broadcom.com,
florian.fainelli@broadcom.com, rafal@milecki.pl,
bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com, andre.przywara@arm.com,
baruch@tkos.co.il, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
dan.carpenter@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/10] dt-bindings: mtd: brcmnand: Updates for bcmbca SoCs
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 16:46:46 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240126-armadillo-clean-e3509ed23ed5@spud> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b2bc0948-7039-4dbd-8152-08a51e744c59@broadcom.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3958 bytes --]
On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 05:55:29PM -0800, William Zhang wrote:
> On 1/25/24 11:51, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 07:01:48PM -0800, William Zhang wrote:
> > > On 1/24/24 09:24, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 07:04:49PM -0800, David Regan wrote:
> > > > > From: William Zhang <william.zhang@broadcom.com>
> > > And the reason I keep it as int is because there could be a potential value
> > > of 2 for another mode that the current driver could set the wp_on to.
> >
> > Can you explain, in driver independent terms, what this other mode has
> > to do with how the WP is connected?
> > Either you've got the standard scenario where apparently "NAND_WPb" and
> > "WP_L" are connected and another situation where they are not.
> > Is there another pin configuration in addition to that, that this 3rd
> > mode represents?
> >
> The 3rd mode is WP pin connected but wp feature is disabled in the
> controller.
What does "disabled" mean? The controller itself is not capable of using
the WP pin because of hardware modifications? Or there's a bit in a
register that disables it and that bit has been set by software?
If it is a hardware difference for that controller, why does it not have
a dedicated compatible? If it's a software decision, then it shouldn't
be in the DT in the first place ;)
We've gone back here a bunch trying to figure stuff out, and you give me
a vague one sentence answer. Please.
> > > I
> > > don't see it is being used in BCMBCA product but I am not sure about other
> > > SoC family. So I don't want to completely close the door here just in case.
> >
> > If you ever need it, you could have a "brcm,wp-in-wacky-configuration"
> > property that indicates that the hardware is configured in that way
> > (providing that this hardware configuration is not just "NAND_WPb" and
> > "WP_L" pins connected. The property can very easily be made mutually
> > exclusive with "brcm,wp-not-connected" iff it ever comes to be.
> Yes we could have a new property but if we can have a single int property to
> cover all, IMHO it is better to just have one property as these three modes
> are related. I would really like to have it as an int property to keep
> things simple.
It is "better" because it is easier for you perhaps, but ripe for abuse.
> But if you think this is absolutely against the dts rule, I will switch to
> the "brcm,wp-not-connected" boolean property as you suggested.
I'll answer this when you describe the mode better, right now I cannot
really comment, but I have not yet seen a justification for the non-flag
version of the property. Even if there's a justification for documenting
that other mode in the DT, I'm likely to still think boolean properties
are a better fit.
> > > > > If ecc
> > > > > + strength and spare area size are set by nand-ecc-strength
> > > > > + and brcm,nand-oob-sector-size in the dts, these settings
> > > > > + have precedence and override this flag.
> > > >
> > > > Again, IMO, this is not for the binding to decide. That is a decision
> > > > for the operating system to make.
> > > >
> > > Again this is just for historic reason and BCMBCA as late player does not
> > > want to break any existing dts setting. So I thought it is useful to
> > > explain here. I can remove this text if you don't think it should be in the
> > > binding document.
> >
> > I don't, at least not in that form. I think it is reasonable to explain
> > why these values are better though.
> I understand the decision is for OS/driver to make. If we were to write
> another driver for other OS, the same precedence will apply too so the
> binding works the same way across all the OS. So I am not sure what better
> explanation or form I can put up here. I am open to any suggestion or I just
> delete it.
I would just delete it tbh.
Thanks,
Conor.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-26 16:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 132+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-24 3:04 [PATCH v3 00/10] mtd: rawnand: brcmnand: driver and doc updates David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` [PATCH v3 01/10] dt-bindings: mtd: brcmnand: Updates for bcmbca SoCs David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` David Regan
2024-01-24 17:24 ` Conor Dooley
2024-01-24 17:24 ` Conor Dooley
2024-01-24 17:24 ` Conor Dooley
2024-01-25 3:01 ` William Zhang
2024-01-25 3:01 ` William Zhang
2024-01-25 3:01 ` William Zhang
2024-01-25 19:51 ` Conor Dooley
2024-01-25 19:51 ` Conor Dooley
2024-01-25 19:51 ` Conor Dooley
2024-01-26 1:55 ` William Zhang
2024-01-26 1:55 ` William Zhang
2024-01-26 1:55 ` William Zhang
2024-01-26 16:46 ` Conor Dooley [this message]
2024-01-26 16:46 ` Conor Dooley
2024-01-26 16:46 ` Conor Dooley
2024-01-26 18:09 ` William Zhang
2024-01-26 18:09 ` William Zhang
2024-01-26 18:09 ` William Zhang
2024-01-24 17:24 ` Conor Dooley
2024-01-24 17:24 ` Conor Dooley
2024-01-24 17:24 ` Conor Dooley
2024-01-24 17:34 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-24 17:34 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-24 17:34 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-25 3:14 ` William Zhang
2024-01-25 3:14 ` William Zhang
2024-01-25 3:14 ` William Zhang
2024-01-24 3:04 ` [PATCH v3 02/10] ARM: dts: broadcom: bcmbca: Add NAND controller node David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` David Regan
2024-01-24 17:30 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-24 17:30 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-24 17:30 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-25 3:09 ` William Zhang
2024-01-25 3:09 ` William Zhang
2024-01-25 3:09 ` William Zhang
2024-01-25 3:34 ` Florian Fainelli
2024-01-25 3:34 ` Florian Fainelli
2024-01-25 3:34 ` Florian Fainelli
2024-01-25 5:53 ` William Zhang
2024-01-25 5:53 ` William Zhang
2024-01-25 5:53 ` William Zhang
2024-01-25 9:20 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-25 9:20 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-25 9:20 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-25 18:14 ` William Zhang
2024-01-25 18:14 ` William Zhang
2024-01-25 18:14 ` William Zhang
2024-01-24 3:04 ` [PATCH v3 03/10] arm64: " David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` [PATCH v3 04/10] mtd: rawnand: brcmnand: Rename bcm63138 nand driver David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` [PATCH v3 05/10] mtd: rawnand: brcmnand: Add BCMBCA read data bus interface David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` [PATCH v3 06/10] mtd: rawnand: brcmnand: Add support for getting ecc setting from strap David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` David Regan
2024-01-24 17:32 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-24 17:32 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-24 17:32 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-25 3:13 ` William Zhang
2024-01-25 3:13 ` William Zhang
2024-01-25 3:13 ` William Zhang
2024-01-24 3:04 ` [PATCH v3 07/10] mtd: rawnand: brcmnand: Support write protection setting from dts David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` [PATCH v3 08/10] mtd: rawnand: brcmnand: exec_op helper functions return type fixes David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` David Regan
2024-01-24 17:35 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-24 17:35 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-24 17:35 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-24 3:04 ` [PATCH v3 09/10] mtd: rawnand: brcmnand: update log level messages David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` David Regan
2024-01-24 17:37 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-24 17:37 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-24 17:37 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-25 18:47 ` David Regan
2024-01-25 18:47 ` David Regan
2024-01-25 18:47 ` David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` [PATCH v3 10/10] mtd: rawnand: brcmnand: allow for on-die ecc David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` David Regan
2024-01-24 3:04 ` David Regan
2024-01-24 17:40 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-24 17:40 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-24 17:40 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-25 19:47 ` David Regan
2024-01-25 19:47 ` David Regan
2024-01-25 19:47 ` David Regan
2024-01-26 6:19 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-26 6:19 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-26 6:19 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-26 19:57 ` David Regan
2024-01-26 19:57 ` David Regan
2024-01-26 19:57 ` David Regan
2024-01-29 10:52 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-29 10:52 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-29 10:52 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-30 8:11 ` William Zhang
2024-01-30 8:11 ` William Zhang
2024-01-30 8:11 ` William Zhang
2024-01-30 11:01 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-30 11:01 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-30 11:01 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-30 15:26 ` David Regan
2024-01-30 15:26 ` David Regan
2024-01-30 15:26 ` David Regan
2024-01-30 18:55 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-30 18:55 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-01-30 18:55 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-02-01 6:48 ` William Zhang
2024-02-01 6:48 ` William Zhang
2024-02-01 6:48 ` William Zhang
2024-02-01 8:25 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-02-01 8:25 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-02-01 8:25 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-02-01 18:53 ` William Zhang
2024-02-01 18:53 ` William Zhang
2024-02-01 18:53 ` William Zhang
2024-02-02 17:38 ` David Regan
2024-02-02 17:38 ` David Regan
2024-02-02 17:38 ` David Regan
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=20240126-armadillo-clean-e3509ed23ed5@spud \
--to=conor@kernel.org \
--cc=anand.gore@broadcom.com \
--cc=andre.przywara@arm.com \
--cc=baruch@tkos.co.il \
--cc=bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com \
--cc=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=dan.beygelman@broadcom.com \
--cc=dan.carpenter@linaro.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dregan@broadcom.com \
--cc=dregan@mail.com \
--cc=florian.fainelli@broadcom.com \
--cc=joel.peshkin@broadcom.com \
--cc=kdasu.kdev@gmail.com \
--cc=krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org \
--cc=kursad.oney@broadcom.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
--cc=rafal@milecki.pl \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=tomer.yacoby@broadcom.com \
--cc=vigneshr@ti.com \
--cc=william.zhang@broadcom.com \
/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.