Re: [PATCH v3] mtd/nand: don't use {read,write}_buf for 8-bit transfers

[Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com>]

On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 10:53:08AM -0800, Brian Norris wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 01:35:36PM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 10:04:28PM -0800, Brian Norris wrote:
> > > 
> > > Unfortunately, I realized that Uwe's patch doesn't go far enough, I
> > > don't think. It looks like it needs something like the following diff
> > > (only compile-tested).
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
> > > index bd39f7b67906..1ab264457d94 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
> > > @@ -2933,7 +2933,7 @@ static int nand_flash_detect_onfi(struct mtd_info *mtd, struct nand_chip *chip,
> > >  					int *busw)
> > >  {
> > >  	struct nand_onfi_params *p = &chip->onfi_params;
> > > -	int i;
> > > +	int i, j;
> > >  	int val;
> > >  
> > >  	/* Try ONFI for unknown chip or LP */
> > > @@ -2942,18 +2942,10 @@ static int nand_flash_detect_onfi(struct mtd_info *mtd, struct nand_chip *chip,
> > >  		chip->read_byte(mtd) != 'F' || chip->read_byte(mtd) != 'I')
> > >  		return 0;
> > >  
> > > -	/*
> > > -	 * ONFI must be probed in 8-bit mode or with NAND_BUSWIDTH_AUTO, not
> > > -	 * with NAND_BUSWIDTH_16
> > > -	 */
> > > -	if (chip->options & NAND_BUSWIDTH_16) {
> > > -		pr_err("ONFI cannot be probed in 16-bit mode; aborting\n");
> > > -		return 0;
> > > -	}
> > > -
> > >  	chip->cmdfunc(mtd, NAND_CMD_PARAM, 0, -1);
> > >  	for (i = 0; i < 3; i++) {
> > > -		chip->read_buf(mtd, (uint8_t *)p, sizeof(*p));
> > > +		for (j = 0; j < sizeof(*p); j++)
> > > +			*(uint8_t *)p = chip->read_byte(mtd);
> > >  		if (onfi_crc16(ONFI_CRC_BASE, (uint8_t *)p, 254) ==
> > >  				le16_to_cpu(p->crc)) {
> > >  			break;
> > > 
> > > What do you think? (And more importantly, how does this test out for
> > > you?)
> > > 
> > 
> > Your proposal would work (fixing a minor typo for incrementing 'p'),
> > except the nand_command() implementation messes with the buswith.
> > Therefore, after a long debugging session, I could make it work using
> > this hack:
> > 
> > @@ -542,8 +545,8 @@ static void nand_command(struct mtd_info *mtd, unsigned int command,
> >  	/* Serially input address */
> >  	if (column != -1) {
> >  		/* Adjust columns for 16 bit buswidth */
> > -		if (chip->options & NAND_BUSWIDTH_16)
> > -			column >>= 1;
> > +//		if (chip->options & NAND_BUSWIDTH_16)
> > +//			column >>= 1;
> >  		chip->cmd_ctrl(mtd, column, ctrl);
> >  		ctrl &= ~NAND_CTRL_CHANGE;
> >  	}
> 
> Hmm, that does seem like a hack. What command is giving you problems, by
> the way?

READ_ID

> And is the NAND operational after this hack?
> 

Yup, I guess so. It takes some time to prepare the hardware to test
that, so I'll be to re-test it properly to provide some more complete
answer.
-- 
Ezequiel García, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android Engineering
http://free-electrons.com