From: "Alexey, Korolev" <alexey.korolev@intel.com>
To: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
Cc: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cfi: Fixup of write errors on XIP
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 19:35:31 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <44071ED3.1030302@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0603021012120.29834@localhost.localdomain>
Nicolas
> Please don't just yet.
>
> > The scenario of the issue is following:
> >
> > 1. do_write_buffer
> > 2. Waiting for write complete in xip_udelay
> > 3. System Interrupt
> > 4. Write suspend
> > 5. Rescheduling
> > 6. Block erasing by other process. ( This operation typically took
> > rather long time )
> > 7. Complete, rescheduling
> > 8. Return to write (write is not complete due to suspend ).
> > 9. Check timeout. Time is up.
> > 10. Error.
>
> This should not happen. And if it does then the bug is in xip_udelay()
> and therefore should be fixed there.
>
> The fact is, xip_udelay() should not return until either the flash
> status is 0x80 (done) or the delay expired. The code looks like:
>
This is absolutelly correct.
But delay may expire sometimes before chip get ready even if chip has
not been suspended.
Buffer programming time for chip may vary.
For example timeout has expired couple usecs before status get ready.
(the such variations are absolutely ok).
You go up to do_write_buffer, and get the described scenario if chips
has been suspended at the very begging of waiting in xip_uddelay.
I thought about possibility to make fix in xip_udelay, but I didn't find
a good solution here.
Thanks a lot,
Alexey
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-02 16:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-03-01 18:20 [PATCH] cfi: Fixup of write errors on XIP Korolev, Alexey
2006-03-02 15:36 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-03-02 16:35 ` Alexey, Korolev [this message]
2006-03-10 16:36 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-03-21 14:26 ` Alexey, Korolev
2006-03-21 15:10 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-03-28 14:09 ` Alexey, Korolev
2006-03-29 16:34 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-03-29 16:44 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-03-30 2:54 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-03-30 13:27 ` Alexey, Korolev
2006-03-30 14:38 ` Nicolas Pitre
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-03-02 10:18 Korolev, Alexey
2006-02-22 18:17 Korolev, Alexey
2006-03-01 17:48 ` Alexey, Korolev
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=44071ED3.1030302@intel.com \
--to=alexey.korolev@intel.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=nico@cam.org \
/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