From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
To: Christophe Kerello <christophe.kerello@foss.st.com>
Cc: <richard@nod.at>, <vigneshr@ti.com>, <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
<srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>, <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
<devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, <chenshumin86@sina.com>,
Tudor Ambarus <Tudor.Ambarus@microchip.com>,
Pratyush Yadav <p.yadav@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] mtd: core: Fix a conflict between MTD and NVMEM on wp-gpios property
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2022 14:43:09 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220131144309.0ffe7cc8@xps13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220131095755.8981-5-christophe.kerello@foss.st.com>
Hi Vignesh, Tudory, Pratyush,
+ Tudor and Pratyush
christophe.kerello@foss.st.com wrote on Mon, 31 Jan 2022 10:57:55 +0100:
> Wp-gpios property can be used on NVMEM nodes and the same property can
> be also used on MTD NAND nodes. In case of the wp-gpios property is
> defined at NAND level node, the GPIO management is done at NAND driver
> level. Write protect is disabled when the driver is probed or resumed
> and is enabled when the driver is released or suspended.
>
> When no partitions are defined in the NAND DT node, then the NAND DT node
> will be passed to NVMEM framework. If wp-gpios property is defined in
> this node, the GPIO resource is taken twice and the NAND controller
> driver fails to probe.
>
> A new Boolean flag named skip_wp_gpio has been added in nvmem_config.
> In case skip_wp_gpio is set, it means that the GPIO is handled by the
> provider. Lets set this flag in MTD layer to avoid the conflict on
> wp_gpios property.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christophe Kerello <christophe.kerello@foss.st.com>
> ---
> drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c b/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c
> index 70f492dce158..e6d251594def 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c
> @@ -546,6 +546,7 @@ static int mtd_nvmem_add(struct mtd_info *mtd)
> config.stride = 1;
> config.read_only = true;
> config.root_only = true;
> + config.skip_wp_gpio = true;
> config.no_of_node = !of_device_is_compatible(node, "nvmem-cells");
> config.priv = mtd;
>
> @@ -833,6 +834,7 @@ static struct nvmem_device *mtd_otp_nvmem_register(struct mtd_info *mtd,
> config.owner = THIS_MODULE;
> config.type = NVMEM_TYPE_OTP;
> config.root_only = true;
> + config.skip_wp_gpio = true;
> config.reg_read = reg_read;
> config.size = size;
> config.of_node = np;
TLDR: There is a conflict between MTD and NVMEM, who should handle the
WP pin when there is one? At least for raw NAND devices, I don't want
the NVMEM core to handle the wp pin. So we've introduced this
skip_wp_gpio nvmem config option. But there are two places where this
boolean can be set and one of these is for otp regions (see above). In
this case, I don't know if it is safe or if CFI/SPI-NOR rely on the
nvmem protection. Please tell us if you think this is fine for you.
Thanks,
Miquèl
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-31 13:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-31 9:57 [PATCH v2 0/4] mtd: rawnand: stm32_fmc2: Add NAND Write Protect support Christophe Kerello
2022-01-31 9:57 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] dt-binding: mtd: nand: Document the wp-gpios property Christophe Kerello
2022-01-31 9:57 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] mtd: rawnand: stm32_fmc2: Add NAND Write Protect support Christophe Kerello
2022-01-31 9:57 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] nvmem: core: Fix a conflict between MTD and NVMEM on wp-gpios property Christophe Kerello
2022-02-17 11:01 ` Srinivas Kandagatla
2022-02-17 13:00 ` Christophe Kerello
2022-01-31 9:57 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] mtd: " Christophe Kerello
2022-01-31 13:43 ` Miquel Raynal [this message]
2022-02-01 10:47 ` Pratyush Yadav
2022-02-02 10:44 ` Christophe Kerello
2022-02-02 10:57 ` Miquel Raynal
2022-02-02 11:53 ` Pratyush Yadav
2022-02-16 8:46 ` Christophe Kerello
2022-02-16 9:24 ` Srinivas Kandagatla
2022-02-17 8:48 ` Miquel Raynal
2022-02-17 11:00 ` Srinivas Kandagatla
2022-02-17 14:08 ` Miquel Raynal
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=20220131144309.0ffe7cc8@xps13 \
--to=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
--cc=Tudor.Ambarus@microchip.com \
--cc=chenshumin86@sina.com \
--cc=christophe.kerello@foss.st.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com \
--cc=p.yadav@ti.com \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=srinivas.kandagatla@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).