From: Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@kernel.org>
To: Michael Walle <mwalle@kernel.org>
Cc: Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@kernel.org>,
Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@linaro.org>,
Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
e9hack <e9hack@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: spi-nor: winbond: fix w25q128 regression
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 16:35:31 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <mafs0zfrfel70.fsf@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <91d155ab7526c14e882f7b88a129fbcd@kernel.org> (Michael Walle's message of "Thu, 20 Jun 2024 16:09:13 +0200")
On Thu, Jun 20 2024, Michael Walle wrote:
>>>> > Commit 83e824a4a595 ("mtd: spi-nor: Correct flags for Winbond w25q128")
>>>> That commit did:
>>>> - { "w25q128", INFO(0xef4018, 0, 64 * 1024, 256)
>>>> - NO_SFDP_FLAGS(SECT_4K) },
>>>> + { "w25q128", INFO(0xef4018, 0, 0, 0)
>>>> + PARSE_SFDP
>>>> + FLAGS(SPI_NOR_HAS_LOCK | SPI_NOR_HAS_TB) },
>>>>
>> [...]
>>>> > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
>>>> > index ca67bf2c46c3..6b6dec6f8faf 100644
>>>> > --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
>>>> > +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
>>>> > @@ -105,7 +105,9 @@ static const struct flash_info winbond_nor_parts[] = {
>>>> > }, {
>>>> > .id = SNOR_ID(0xef, 0x40, 0x18),
>>>> > .name = "w25q128",
>>>> > + .size = SZ_16M,
>>>> > .flags = SPI_NOR_HAS_LOCK | SPI_NOR_HAS_TB,
>>>> > + .no_sfdp_flags = SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ,
>>>> and here you add dual and quad to trigger SFDP parsing I guess. All fine
>>>> if the old flash supports dual and quad read. But please update the
>>>> commit message describing the intention. With that ACK. Would be good to
>>>> have this merged soon.
>>> Right. It's not because it will trigger the SFDP parsing, but
>>> because that what was tested by Esben. We're lucky that this will
>>> trigger the SFDP parsing ;) I'll explain that in more detail and add
>>> a Link: to the bug report mail.
>> Should we treat this flash similar to the Macronix ones Esben sent out
>> patches for [0]? It seems that there are some old parts without SFDP
>> support and new ones with SFDP support. From your comment in [1]:
>>
>>> This is an entry matching various flash families from Winbond, see my
>>> reply in v1. I'm not sure we should remove these as we could break the
>>> older ones, which might or might not have SFDP tables. We don't know.
>> Since the entry matches multiple families, do _all_ of them support dual
>> and quad read? If not, attempting to enable dual or quad reads on them
>> can cause problems.
>
> I rely on the information Helmut provided. Also the w25q64 and the w25q256
> both have these flags set. So I'd say it's less likely the 128 doesn't
> support it.
Okay, fair enough.
>
>> Also, for parts that _do_ have SFDP available, won't it be better to use
>> the information in SFDP instead of our hard-coded ones anyway? Using
>> SPI_NOR_TRY_SFDP here would let us do that.
>
> Sure, but this is about fixing the referenced commit. A later patch will
> then move that to TRY_SFDP. We can't fix this regression by introducing
> new code IMHO. This seems to be the easiest fix.
New code will make it harder to backport to stable kernels. Beyond that,
I don't see why we can't fix a regression with new code.
Here's why I suggested this: before 83e824a4a595 ("mtd: spi-nor: Correct
flags for Winbond w25q128"), all flashes with this ID got only the
SECT_4K flag -- and thus only single SPI mode. After that commit, all
flashes with this ID got their settings configured via SFDP. Using the
TRY_SFDP approach allows both of those configurations to co-exist. Old
ones still use the old configuration, new ones get to use SFDP.
Now we add a different configuration that adds dual and quad reads to
these old flashes. As mentioned above, this is unlikely to cause
problems, but a new configuration regardless. So _in principle_ I think
TRY_SFDP would be the best balance.
But I get your point -- since both w25q64 and w25q256 have these flags,
it is likely someone just never bothered updating w25q128. So this patch
LGTM. I'll apply it once you send a new version with an updated commit
message.
>
> -michael
>
>> [0]
>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mtd/20240603-macronix-mx25l3205d-fixups-v2-0-ff98da26835c@geanix.com/
>> [1]
>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mtd/0525440a652854a2a575256cd07d3559@walle.cc/
>
--
Regards,
Pratyush Yadav
______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@kernel.org>
To: Michael Walle <mwalle@kernel.org>
Cc: Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@kernel.org>,
Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@linaro.org>,
Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
e9hack <e9hack@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: spi-nor: winbond: fix w25q128 regression
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 16:35:31 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <mafs0zfrfel70.fsf@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <91d155ab7526c14e882f7b88a129fbcd@kernel.org> (Michael Walle's message of "Thu, 20 Jun 2024 16:09:13 +0200")
On Thu, Jun 20 2024, Michael Walle wrote:
>>>> > Commit 83e824a4a595 ("mtd: spi-nor: Correct flags for Winbond w25q128")
>>>> That commit did:
>>>> - { "w25q128", INFO(0xef4018, 0, 64 * 1024, 256)
>>>> - NO_SFDP_FLAGS(SECT_4K) },
>>>> + { "w25q128", INFO(0xef4018, 0, 0, 0)
>>>> + PARSE_SFDP
>>>> + FLAGS(SPI_NOR_HAS_LOCK | SPI_NOR_HAS_TB) },
>>>>
>> [...]
>>>> > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
>>>> > index ca67bf2c46c3..6b6dec6f8faf 100644
>>>> > --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
>>>> > +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
>>>> > @@ -105,7 +105,9 @@ static const struct flash_info winbond_nor_parts[] = {
>>>> > }, {
>>>> > .id = SNOR_ID(0xef, 0x40, 0x18),
>>>> > .name = "w25q128",
>>>> > + .size = SZ_16M,
>>>> > .flags = SPI_NOR_HAS_LOCK | SPI_NOR_HAS_TB,
>>>> > + .no_sfdp_flags = SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ,
>>>> and here you add dual and quad to trigger SFDP parsing I guess. All fine
>>>> if the old flash supports dual and quad read. But please update the
>>>> commit message describing the intention. With that ACK. Would be good to
>>>> have this merged soon.
>>> Right. It's not because it will trigger the SFDP parsing, but
>>> because that what was tested by Esben. We're lucky that this will
>>> trigger the SFDP parsing ;) I'll explain that in more detail and add
>>> a Link: to the bug report mail.
>> Should we treat this flash similar to the Macronix ones Esben sent out
>> patches for [0]? It seems that there are some old parts without SFDP
>> support and new ones with SFDP support. From your comment in [1]:
>>
>>> This is an entry matching various flash families from Winbond, see my
>>> reply in v1. I'm not sure we should remove these as we could break the
>>> older ones, which might or might not have SFDP tables. We don't know.
>> Since the entry matches multiple families, do _all_ of them support dual
>> and quad read? If not, attempting to enable dual or quad reads on them
>> can cause problems.
>
> I rely on the information Helmut provided. Also the w25q64 and the w25q256
> both have these flags set. So I'd say it's less likely the 128 doesn't
> support it.
Okay, fair enough.
>
>> Also, for parts that _do_ have SFDP available, won't it be better to use
>> the information in SFDP instead of our hard-coded ones anyway? Using
>> SPI_NOR_TRY_SFDP here would let us do that.
>
> Sure, but this is about fixing the referenced commit. A later patch will
> then move that to TRY_SFDP. We can't fix this regression by introducing
> new code IMHO. This seems to be the easiest fix.
New code will make it harder to backport to stable kernels. Beyond that,
I don't see why we can't fix a regression with new code.
Here's why I suggested this: before 83e824a4a595 ("mtd: spi-nor: Correct
flags for Winbond w25q128"), all flashes with this ID got only the
SECT_4K flag -- and thus only single SPI mode. After that commit, all
flashes with this ID got their settings configured via SFDP. Using the
TRY_SFDP approach allows both of those configurations to co-exist. Old
ones still use the old configuration, new ones get to use SFDP.
Now we add a different configuration that adds dual and quad reads to
these old flashes. As mentioned above, this is unlikely to cause
problems, but a new configuration regardless. So _in principle_ I think
TRY_SFDP would be the best balance.
But I get your point -- since both w25q64 and w25q256 have these flags,
it is likely someone just never bothered updating w25q128. So this patch
LGTM. I'll apply it once you send a new version with an updated commit
message.
>
> -michael
>
>> [0]
>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mtd/20240603-macronix-mx25l3205d-fixups-v2-0-ff98da26835c@geanix.com/
>> [1]
>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mtd/0525440a652854a2a575256cd07d3559@walle.cc/
>
--
Regards,
Pratyush Yadav
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-20 14:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-10 7:48 [PATCH] mtd: spi-nor: winbond: fix w25q128 regression Michael Walle
2024-06-10 7:48 ` Michael Walle
2024-06-10 18:10 ` e9hack
2024-06-18 10:10 ` Linus Walleij
2024-06-18 10:10 ` Linus Walleij
2024-06-18 10:33 ` Tudor Ambarus
2024-06-18 10:33 ` Tudor Ambarus
2024-06-18 11:14 ` Michael Walle
2024-06-18 11:14 ` Michael Walle
2024-06-20 14:02 ` Pratyush Yadav
2024-06-20 14:02 ` Pratyush Yadav
2024-06-20 14:09 ` Michael Walle
2024-06-20 14:09 ` Michael Walle
2024-06-20 14:35 ` Pratyush Yadav [this message]
2024-06-20 14:35 ` Pratyush Yadav
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-10-28 11:44 Linus Walleij
2024-10-29 5:49 ` Tudor Ambarus
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=mafs0zfrfel70.fsf@kernel.org \
--to=pratyush@kernel.org \
--cc=e9hack@gmail.com \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
--cc=mwalle@kernel.org \
--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.