Re: [PATCH 3/8] mtd: spi-nor: move "wait-till-ready" checks into erase/write functions

[Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>]

On Sat, Aug 09, 2014 at 04:42:24PM +0800, Huang Shijie wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 06, 2014 at 06:16:57PM -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
> > We shouldn't have *every* function checking if a previous write is
> > complete; this should be done synchronously after each write/erase.
> 
> IMHO, this is not a good idea. :(

Do you mean you think it is a good idea for every unrelated function to
check if the previous erase/write is complete?

> this patch prevents the erase-suspend and program-suspend.
> We should add these two features for spi-nor in future.

OK, how would you propose that such features be implemented, and how
would they be used to the benefit of higher layers?

Directed toward the former: specifically, how does leaving the
SR/FSR-checking burden on all subsequent commands benefit a potential
erase/program suspend implementation? The code is not written at all
with erase/program suspend in mind, and the current patch solves a
current problem; that we perform checking in all the wrong places.

To the latter: are file systems (e.g., UBIFS) aware of suspend-able
program/erase? Would they have the knowledge to take advantage of
suspend-able program/erase? i.e., could they suspend an unimportant
erase command in order to prioritize a read or write?

Finally, this patch mostly prepares for elimination of code from
lower-level drivers (m25p80.c and fsl-quadspi, in the following two
patches). These drivers should *not* be worrying about the details of
command statuses; this should be handled by the generic code
(spi-nor.c).

So, unless you can provide some outline as to how program/erase suspend
can be implemented reasonably within this framework, and how this
particular patch makes that so much more difficult, I plan to move
forward with this.

Thanks,
Brian