From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:37396)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <armbru@redhat.com>) id 1gw7aq-0004xP-Hf
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 10:46:01 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <armbru@redhat.com>) id 1gw7ap-0002Rx-Fn
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 10:46:00 -0500
From: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
References: <20190218125615.18970-1-armbru@redhat.com>
	<20190218125615.18970-7-armbru@redhat.com>
	<CAFEAcA_OLYno=YNS6bHOemwEp0gnc3fwRn8Rjvmo9v-i89xrMA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 16:45:47 +0100
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA_OLYno=YNS6bHOemwEp0gnc3fwRn8Rjvmo9v-i89xrMA@mail.gmail.com>
	(Peter Maydell's message of "Tue, 19 Feb 2019 14:03:16 +0000")
Message-ID: <87d0nnsrx0.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 06/10] r2d: Flash memory creation is
 confused about size, mark FIXME
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>, Qemu-block <qemu-block@nongnu.org>, Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>, Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>, QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>, qemu-ppc <qemu-ppc@nongnu.org>, Alex =?utf-8?Q?Benn=C3=A9e?= <alex.bennee@linaro.org>

Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> writes:

> On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 13:07, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> pflash_cfi02_register() takes a size in bytes, a block size in bytes
>> and a number of blocks.  r2d_init() passes FLASH_SIZE, 16 * KiB,
>> FLASH_SIZE >> 16.  Does not compute: size doesn't match block size *
>> number of blocks.  The latter happens to win.  I tried to find
>> documentation on the physcial hardware, no luck.
>>
>> For now, adjust the byte size passed to match the actual size created,
>> and add a FIXME comment.
>
> I'm pretty sure that FLASH_SIZE here is supposed to be a
> byte count of the size of the pflash. That matches what
> Linux has in arch/sh/boards/mach-r2d/setup.c where it
> sets up the flash_resource struct.

Okay, that's some evidence for size 0x02000000 (32MiB).

However, we've created size (16 * KiB) * (FLASH_SIZE >> 16), i.e. 8MiB,
since at least commit 368a354f02b (v1.3.0), possibly since forever.

> The r2dplus board is also I think known as RTS7751R2D. That
> takes us to https://elinux.org/RTS7751R2D_Handling_Manual
> (sadly the link to the "hardware manual" is broken).

Quote section Flash ROM Mapping:

    Currently, MTD device mapping on Flash ROM is set as below.
    0x00000000-0x00020000 	"bootloader" 	
    0x00020000-0x00320000 	"mtdblock1" 	XIP kernel
    0x00320000-0x00520000 	"mtdblock2" 	
    0x00520000-0x01000000 	"mtdblock3" 	

Suggests a size of 0x01000000 (16MiB).  Now we have three candidates.

Pick one, any one, and I'll adjust my patch.  All I really care about is
getting argument @size consistent with arguments @sector_len and
@nb_blocs, so I can ditch @nb_blocs in PATCH 09.

> No idea what the block size would be.

As long as that's the case, inertia wins by default.