qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: David Engraf <david.engraf@sysgo.com>,
	Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>,
	QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
	Qemu-block <qemu-block@nongnu.org>, Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>,
	dgilbert@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] pflash_cfi01: fix per device sector length in CFI table
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 12:36:19 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170112113619.zuc5tuhmhzvawnmz@hawk.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA8asry6LGTuv+SLVyemNVFk9Q7WhU74Cc2YA_yud8qPMg@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 10:42:41AM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 12 January 2017 at 10:35, David Engraf <david.engraf@sysgo.com> wrote:
> > The CFI entry for sector length must be set to sector length per device.
> > This is important for boards using multiple devices like the ARM Vexpress
> > board (width = 4, device-width = 2).
> >
> > Linux and u-boots calculate the size ratio by dividing both values:
> >
> > size_ratio = info->portwidth / info->chipwidth;
> >
> > After that the sector length will be multiplied by the size_ratio, thus the
> > CFI entry for sector length is doubled. When Linux or u-boot send a sector
> > erase, they expect to erase the doubled sector length, but QEMU only erases
> > the board specified sector length.
> >
> > This patch fixes the sector length in the CFI table to match the length per
> > device, equal to blocks_per_device.
> 
> Thanks for the patch. I haven't checked against the pflash spec yet,
> but this looks like it's probably the right thing.
> 
> The only two machines which use a setup with multiple devices (ie
> which specify device_width to the pflash_cfi01) are vexpress and virt.
> For all other machines this patch leaves the behaviour unchanged.
> 
> Q: do we need to have some kind of nasty hack so that pre-2.9 virt
> still gets the old broken values in the CFI table, for version and
> migration compatibility? Ccing Drew for an opinion...
>

I'm pretty sure we need the nasty hack, but I'm also Ccing David for
his opinion.

Thanks,
drew

  reply	other threads:[~2017-01-12 11:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-01-12 10:35 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] pflash_cfi01: fix per device sector length in CFI table David Engraf
2017-01-12 10:42 ` Peter Maydell
2017-01-12 11:36   ` Andrew Jones [this message]
2017-01-12 12:01     ` David Engraf
2017-01-16 10:26     ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2017-01-17 16:48       ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] " David Engraf
2017-01-27 14:31     ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] " Peter Maydell
2017-01-27 14:54       ` Peter Maydell
2017-01-27 15:13         ` Andrew Jones

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=20170112113619.zuc5tuhmhzvawnmz@hawk.localdomain \
    --to=drjones@redhat.com \
    --cc=david.engraf@sysgo.com \
    --cc=dgilbert@redhat.com \
    --cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
    --cc=mreitz@redhat.com \
    --cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
    --cc=qemu-block@nongnu.org \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.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).