From: "Anders Grafström" <grfstrm@users.sourceforge.net>
To: Andrew Klossner <andrew@cesa.opbu.xerox.com>
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0001.c: correct block lock timeout
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 17:27:59 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49CA5B8F.7040502@users.sourceforge.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200903241814.n2OIEdBZ026558@pogo.cesa.opbu.xerox.com>
Andrew Klossner wrote:
> The time parameters to WAIT_TIMEOUT are in units of microseconds, so
> one second must be expressed as 1000000 not 1000000/HZ.
>
> The Intel Strataflash part with which this patch was tested takes 0.7
> seconds to lock/unlock, so one second does indeed seem to be a good
> timeout value.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Klossner <andrew@cesa.opbu.xerox.com>
> ---
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0001.c b/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0001.c
> index f5ab6fa..97f3c71 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0001.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0001.c
> @@ -2041,7 +2041,7 @@ static int __xipram do_xxlock_oneblock(struct map_info *map, struct flchip *chip
> * If Instant Individual Block Locking supported then no need
> * to delay.
> */
> - udelay = (!extp || !(extp->FeatureSupport & (1 << 5))) ? 1000000/HZ : 0;
> + udelay = (!extp || !(extp->FeatureSupport & (1 << 5))) ? 1000000 : 0;
>
> ret = WAIT_TIMEOUT(map, chip, adr, udelay, udelay * 100);
> if (ret) {
If I'm not mistaken, this will change the minimum sleep time to half a second
for set lock-bit operations as well (for !XIP). Aren't those in the usec range?
The last argument to WAIT_TIMEOUT(), udelay_max, is the actual timeout.
It should have been 'udelay * HZ', i.e. it would have worked for HZ=100 but not for HZ=1000.
(The J5 datasheet says 7 seconds max clear lock-bit time, so times 10 might even be in place.)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0001.c b/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0001.c
index b234ab9..d2e4fdf 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0001.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0001.c
@@ -2069,7 +2069,7 @@ static int __xipram do_xxlock_oneblock(struct map_info *map, struct flchip *chip
*/
udelay = (!extp || !(extp->FeatureSupport & (1 << 5))) ? 1000000/HZ : 0;
- ret = WAIT_TIMEOUT(map, chip, adr, udelay, udelay * 100);
+ ret = WAIT_TIMEOUT(map, chip, adr, udelay, udelay * HZ * 10);
if (ret) {
map_write(map, CMD(0x70), adr);
chip->state = FL_STATUS;
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-25 16:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-24 18:14 [PATCH] drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0001.c: correct block lock timeout Andrew Klossner
2009-03-25 16:27 ` Anders Grafström [this message]
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=49CA5B8F.7040502@users.sourceforge.net \
--to=grfstrm@users.sourceforge.net \
--cc=andrew@cesa.opbu.xerox.com \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).