Re: [PATCH 1/2] mtd/chips: add SST39WF160x NOR-flashes

[Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1405 bytes --]

On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 01:44:48AM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-04-27 at 04:19 +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > Due to a broken CFI, they have to be added to jedec_probe.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de>
> > Cc: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
> > Cc: David Woodhouse <David.Woodhouse@intel.com>
> > ---
> > 
> > Sadly, those two cannot be detected using Guillaume's SST-patchset.
> 
> Why not? Guillaume has patches which add quirks for specific SST chips;
> what is fundamentally different about these chips that means you can't
> take the same approach?

See his patch 3/8. He introduces:

+#define P_ID_SST_OLD            0x0701

so, he can then do:

+       if (cfi->cfiq->P_ID == P_ID_SST_OLD) {
+               addr_unlock1 = 0x5555;
+               addr_unlock2 = 0x2AAA;
+       }
+

Only after that, he can query for more CFI-information/product ID and apply the
quirks.

My flashes don't have P_ID_SST_OLD, sadly, but P_ID_AMD_STD. Still, unlike
other AMD_STD-flashes, my flashes need their custom unlock address. I couldn't
find a way to distinguish this from the standard case with the regular unlock
addresses.

Kind regards,

   Wolfram

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Wolfram Sang                |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]