From: Esben Haabendal <esben@geanix.com>
To: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@linaro.org>
Cc: Michael Walle <mwalle@kernel.org>,
Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@kernel.org>,
Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@prevas.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mtd: spi-nor: core: add flag for doing optional SFDP
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2024 19:20:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87zfry9edn.fsf@geanix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48719b0f-1a7f-47f9-948a-c981a0a29b41@linaro.org> (Tudor Ambarus's message of "Thu, 6 Jun 2024 15:52:35 +0100")
Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@linaro.org> writes:
> On 6/6/24 14:59, Michael Walle wrote:
>> On Thu Jun 6, 2024 at 3:31 PM CEST, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
>>> On 6/3/24 14:09, Esben Haabendal wrote:
>>>> A dedicated flag for triggering call to
>>>> spi_nor_sfdp_init_params_deprecated() allows enabling optional SFDP read
>>>> and parse, with fallback to legacy flash parameters, without having dual,
>>>> quad or octal parameters set in the legacy flash parameters.
>>>>
>>>> With this, spi-nor flash parts without SFDP that is replaced with a
>>>> different flash NOR flash part that does have SFDP, but shares the same
>>>> manufacturer and device ID is easily handled.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Esben Haabendal <esben@geanix.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c | 3 ++-
>>>> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.h | 1 +
>>>> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c
>>>> index 3e1f1913536b..1c4d66fc993b 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c
>>>> @@ -2933,7 +2933,8 @@ static void spi_nor_init_params_deprecated(struct spi_nor *nor)
>>>>
>>>> spi_nor_manufacturer_init_params(nor);
>>>>
>>>> - if (nor->info->no_sfdp_flags & (SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ |
>>>> + if (nor->info->no_sfdp_flags & (SPI_NOR_TRY_SFDP |
>>>
>>> I don't like that we update deprecated methods. The solution though is
>>> elegant.
>>
>> I actually had the same concern. But currently there is no
>> non-deprecated way to handle this case, right?
>>
>> Right now we have the following cases:
>> (1) pure SFDP parsing
>> (2) non-SFDP flashes with static configuration only
>> (3) legacy implementation, where the magic flags decide whether we
>> use SFDP
>>
>> Which case is eventually used depends on the ID of the flash -
>> assuming there will only be IDs which either fall into (1) *or* (2).
>> That assumption is clearly wrong :)
>>
>> I'd propose a new case in spi_nor_init_params()
>> (4) try SFDP with a fallback to the static flags from the
>> flash_info db.
>>
>
> that's not that bad, but I would avoid doing it if it's not common. You
> also have to update the core a bit, you can't use no_sfdp_flags &
> TRY_SFDP, it's misleading. Does it worth it?
>
> I won't oppose too much, but to me it feels that we're trying to keep
> alive a dead man.
Which dead man are you referring to? The legacy implementation or the
old non-SFDP Macronix part?
/Esben
______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Esben Haabendal <esben@geanix.com>
To: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@linaro.org>
Cc: Michael Walle <mwalle@kernel.org>,
Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@kernel.org>,
Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@prevas.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mtd: spi-nor: core: add flag for doing optional SFDP
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2024 19:20:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87zfry9edn.fsf@geanix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48719b0f-1a7f-47f9-948a-c981a0a29b41@linaro.org> (Tudor Ambarus's message of "Thu, 6 Jun 2024 15:52:35 +0100")
Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@linaro.org> writes:
> On 6/6/24 14:59, Michael Walle wrote:
>> On Thu Jun 6, 2024 at 3:31 PM CEST, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
>>> On 6/3/24 14:09, Esben Haabendal wrote:
>>>> A dedicated flag for triggering call to
>>>> spi_nor_sfdp_init_params_deprecated() allows enabling optional SFDP read
>>>> and parse, with fallback to legacy flash parameters, without having dual,
>>>> quad or octal parameters set in the legacy flash parameters.
>>>>
>>>> With this, spi-nor flash parts without SFDP that is replaced with a
>>>> different flash NOR flash part that does have SFDP, but shares the same
>>>> manufacturer and device ID is easily handled.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Esben Haabendal <esben@geanix.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c | 3 ++-
>>>> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.h | 1 +
>>>> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c
>>>> index 3e1f1913536b..1c4d66fc993b 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c
>>>> @@ -2933,7 +2933,8 @@ static void spi_nor_init_params_deprecated(struct spi_nor *nor)
>>>>
>>>> spi_nor_manufacturer_init_params(nor);
>>>>
>>>> - if (nor->info->no_sfdp_flags & (SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ |
>>>> + if (nor->info->no_sfdp_flags & (SPI_NOR_TRY_SFDP |
>>>
>>> I don't like that we update deprecated methods. The solution though is
>>> elegant.
>>
>> I actually had the same concern. But currently there is no
>> non-deprecated way to handle this case, right?
>>
>> Right now we have the following cases:
>> (1) pure SFDP parsing
>> (2) non-SFDP flashes with static configuration only
>> (3) legacy implementation, where the magic flags decide whether we
>> use SFDP
>>
>> Which case is eventually used depends on the ID of the flash -
>> assuming there will only be IDs which either fall into (1) *or* (2).
>> That assumption is clearly wrong :)
>>
>> I'd propose a new case in spi_nor_init_params()
>> (4) try SFDP with a fallback to the static flags from the
>> flash_info db.
>>
>
> that's not that bad, but I would avoid doing it if it's not common. You
> also have to update the core a bit, you can't use no_sfdp_flags &
> TRY_SFDP, it's misleading. Does it worth it?
>
> I won't oppose too much, but to me it feels that we're trying to keep
> alive a dead man.
Which dead man are you referring to? The legacy implementation or the
old non-SFDP Macronix part?
/Esben
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-06 17:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-03 13:09 [PATCH v2 0/2] mtd: spi-nor: macronix: workaround for device id re-use Esben Haabendal
2024-06-03 13:09 ` Esben Haabendal
2024-06-03 13:09 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] mtd: spi-nor: core: add flag for doing optional SFDP Esben Haabendal
2024-06-03 13:09 ` Esben Haabendal
2024-06-06 13:31 ` Tudor Ambarus
2024-06-06 13:31 ` Tudor Ambarus
2024-06-06 13:59 ` Michael Walle
2024-06-06 13:59 ` Michael Walle
2024-06-06 14:52 ` Tudor Ambarus
2024-06-06 14:52 ` Tudor Ambarus
2024-06-06 15:06 ` Michael Walle
2024-06-06 15:06 ` Michael Walle
2024-06-06 17:20 ` Esben Haabendal
2024-06-06 17:20 ` Esben Haabendal
2024-06-07 9:22 ` Tudor Ambarus
2024-06-07 9:22 ` Tudor Ambarus
2024-06-07 13:30 ` Esben Haabendal
2024-06-07 13:30 ` Esben Haabendal
2024-06-12 8:51 ` Michael Walle
2024-06-12 8:51 ` Michael Walle
2024-06-06 17:20 ` Esben Haabendal [this message]
2024-06-06 17:20 ` Esben Haabendal
2024-07-10 18:42 ` Esben Haabendal
2024-07-10 18:42 ` Esben Haabendal
2024-07-11 9:02 ` Michael Walle
2024-07-11 9:02 ` Michael Walle
2024-07-11 11:55 ` Esben Haabendal
2024-07-11 11:55 ` Esben Haabendal
2024-06-06 17:13 ` Esben Haabendal
2024-06-06 17:13 ` Esben Haabendal
2024-06-03 13:09 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] mtd: spi-nor: macronix: enable quad/dual speed for mx25l3205d chips Esben Haabendal
2024-06-03 13:09 ` Esben Haabendal
2024-06-06 13:33 ` Tudor Ambarus
2024-06-06 13:33 ` Tudor Ambarus
2024-06-06 17:23 ` Esben Haabendal
2024-06-06 17:23 ` Esben Haabendal
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=87zfry9edn.fsf@geanix.com \
--to=esben@geanix.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
--cc=mwalle@kernel.org \
--cc=pratyush@kernel.org \
--cc=rasmus.villemoes@prevas.dk \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=tudor.ambarus@linaro.org \
--cc=vigneshr@ti.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.