Re: [PATCH 3/3] MTD: spi-nor: add flag to not use sector erase.

Marek Vasut
2015-05-04T14:11:36Z

On Monday, May 04, 2015 at 03:39:44 PM, Michal Suchanek wrote:
> On 4 May 2015 at 15:35, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:
> > On Monday, May 04, 2015 at 03:18:56 PM, Michal Suchanek wrote:
> >> On 4 May 2015 at 14:12, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:
> >> > On Monday, May 04, 2015 at 01:11:03 PM, Michal Suchanek wrote:
> >> >> It mentions both
> >> >> 32KB Block Erase (BE) (52H)
> >> >> and
> >> >> 64KB Block Erase (BE) (D8H)
> >> >
> >> > The SPI NOR framework will use 0xbe opcode, no problem.
> >> >
> >> >> So the chip probably tries its best to be compatible with any command
> >> >> set and this last patch is not needed. The memory organization table
> >> >> on page 7 is not all that reassuring, though.
> >> >
> >> > Which exact part do you refer to please ?
> >>
> >> Start of page 7 where it says sector size 32/64K in either datasheet.
> >>
> >> It can refer to both BE opcode variants being supported but it's quite
> >> unclear.
> >
> > My guess here would be that the internal organisation of the SPI NOR is
> > in 4k blocks, which is no surprise really. My understanding is that
> > opcode 0x52 erases 8x4k sector (ie. 32k of data) while 0xd8 erases 16x4k
> > sector (ie. 64k of data). I don't see any problem here -- there are two
> > different opcodes which do two different things and their behavior
> > matches the one on various other SPI NORs.
> >
> >> Write protection seems to be calculated in 4k sectors and not blocks
> >> so the block size does not seem very relevant.
> >
> > See above. Does it make sense now please ?
>
> Yes,
>
> makes sense.

I'm glad to hear this got cleared up, thanks ! :)

Best regards,
Marek Vasut