From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
To: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@wedev4u.fr>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>,
Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] mtd: nand: wait for tWHR, and fix the setup_data_interface of Denali
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2017 16:29:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170929162935.597f4fb8@bbrezillon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK7LNASh=wLuyzGQEVQaNaNi=f-imKn1ybDx36L702c9WD_zvQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 23:06:42 +0900
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> wrote:
> 2017-09-29 21:26 GMT+09:00 Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>:
> > On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 19:38:38 +0900
> > Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> wrote:
> >
> >> 1/2 : add NAND_WAIT_TWHR and nand_whr_delay().
> >> You can set this new flag if you want nand_command(_lp)
> >> to insert tWHR delay where needed.
> >>
> >> 2/2 : Fix Denali setup_data_interface.
> >> Boris' suggestion in v1 was a good reminder that
> >> made me realize tCCS was missing in the driver. Fix it now.
> >>
> >>
> >> Changes in v2:
> >> - Add nand_whr_delay() helper
> >> Wait for tWHR only for drivers that explicitly set NAND_WAIT_TWHR flag
> >> - newly added
> >>
> >> Masahiro Yamada (2):
> >> mtd: nand: wait for tWHR after NAND_CMD_STATUS / NAND_CMD_READID
> >
> > Hm, I thought you were introducing this to then use it in the denali
> > driver. Sorry, but I don't want to apply something that nobody needs.
> > If someone ever complains about a missing delay I'll point him to your
> > patch, but until then I'll keep the core unchanged.
>
>
> At first, I thought this was necessary for me,
> but I realized it was my misunderstanding.
>
>
> Please let me explain one more.
>
> See commit 3158fa0e739615769cc047d2428f30f4c3b6640e.
>
> Prior to that commit, READID waited for #R/B transition,
> it was wrong, so I fixed it.
>
> However, it dropped the delay completely.
> If somebody was implicitly relying on the delay of chip->dev_ready,
> the first byte might be read out before the valid data
> is available.
>
> This was motivation of v1, where inserted ndelay(200)
> unconditionally.
Okay. Anyway, this extra delay is activated with an opt-in flag (I
know, I'm the one who asked that), and noone set this flag in
chip->options, so, if there's a bug, it's still here even after
applying "mtd: nand: wait for tWHR after NAND_CMD_STATUS /
NAND_CMD_READID".
Honestly, I think all advanced controllers have the tWHR/tRHW timings
enforced in the HW logic (configurable through a reg). This leaves
basic controllers like the nand-gpio one, and even for these ones, the
delay between the chip->cmd_ctrl(ADDR) and chip->read_buf() calls is
probably long enough to hide the problem.
Note that I'm absolutely not against this patch, it's just that I'd
like to have a real user before merging this logic.
>
>
>
>
>
> >> mtd: nand: denali: fix setup_data_interface to meet tCCS delay
> >
> > This one is valid. I'll queue it to nand/next soon.
>
> If you drop 1/2, please let me do v3.
>
> V2 mentions NAND_WAIT_TWHR, this is strange.
>
Sure.
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-29 14:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-09-29 10:38 [PATCH v2 0/2] mtd: nand: wait for tWHR, and fix the setup_data_interface of Denali Masahiro Yamada
2017-09-29 10:38 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] mtd: nand: wait for tWHR after NAND_CMD_STATUS / NAND_CMD_READID Masahiro Yamada
2017-09-29 10:38 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] mtd: nand: denali: fix setup_data_interface to meet tCCS delay Masahiro Yamada
2017-09-29 12:26 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] mtd: nand: wait for tWHR, and fix the setup_data_interface of Denali Boris Brezillon
2017-09-29 14:06 ` Masahiro Yamada
2017-09-29 14:29 ` Boris Brezillon [this message]
2017-09-29 14:33 ` Masahiro Yamada
2017-10-04 11:05 ` Marc Gonzalez
2017-10-13 8:34 ` Masahiro Yamada
2017-10-19 14:58 ` Marc Gonzalez
2017-10-25 17:04 ` Masahiro Yamada
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=20170929162935.597f4fb8@bbrezillon \
--to=boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com \
--cc=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
--cc=cyrille.pitchen@wedev4u.fr \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=marek.vasut@gmail.com \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=yamada.masahiro@socionext.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