From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98C7CC433EF for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 02:42:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235544AbiCVCoQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Mar 2022 22:44:16 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40762 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235473AbiCVCoP (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Mar 2022 22:44:15 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x631.google.com (mail-pl1-x631.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::631]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F57549680 for ; Mon, 21 Mar 2022 19:42:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x631.google.com with SMTP id e5so2539659pls.4 for ; Mon, 21 Mar 2022 19:42:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language:to :cc:references:from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=rEY/h+4Sphr0hAcylYNk2Yi0tkyfCG6fY8IoqjvLISs=; b=pMq1IK2/MsNaini+cWJAPY8v6lDfRGOCPp9vZ4pYUlMd4ORcdU2ETbsu3Wc4b2mn6P KDuFqPCqsEeHi/5lTzJh9HARLqlGPGCP9uV96une4gIf+/TILqUPI4YpoKGS1/GM76Ih dAMheLYvGTEJLsE+S0R0Q3gcOMWELyry349XMGnYm9zpvLY8T+dpB1JloHW3YXSQvSD9 GblRvhsRI1DiHf4+5wx8OjxbPkh5r44In8LhSb/fMV9ah0t1kcvqVs346bAeWFX28vfn BAxk57QM+wLNFErgB2R18gkfzW7q1yoOqtzgQPujgkPPhPQFj18LOORqV6RqExo9JjOt 5Izw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=rEY/h+4Sphr0hAcylYNk2Yi0tkyfCG6fY8IoqjvLISs=; b=nwqQuh/pTzaDJx7OyFkSlPlcb4Gh+056JcC6MOUPfPStKd58ueob/nqPBi5x4XSYKf XokmpgvVtg2Eo+nMYSddFFnzja6CLWJAgkqDhUqt9qHcwwVOHRWtS/e2+o7KyfNnGPFu Y0zVidMkbeWg+y4ha2Q0Hly5SNsGUNqrXAlae1Uo+gK4ALqsn0pZzyJbxtM/vWMH60D2 oM1qshzFTRZgEeZ4qwyfJZIxhdRvrNFpHeOoC1ejIkj6D5HKEl5fCzGY8KrOYKRAmaif kofexARpEOKZGoGS8q25QthgDVv96INqrNNIPNCpRnFLxcy3VzvmgcSvr/AVq0zsGEZ1 AAbQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533TWtXOQor6ct4NRHG0DGZ/JexdHAPaSi6ZNVoMl+E1b/HoSC2a uV0JeTTMjf7XO23YL96toC0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJydaDcy3GFhYZJU5jDclfHGMnQOlokHTjIv8xDMjZUzOLN5KBHfD5tarxsdTdmZ1lU4X296XQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:ce90:b0:154:3029:97e6 with SMTP id f16-20020a170902ce9000b00154302997e6mr13983574plg.111.1647916968584; Mon, 21 Mar 2022 19:42:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.122.100] (133-175-21-116.tokyo.ap.gmo-isp.jp. [133.175.21.116]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i7-20020a628707000000b004fa6eb33b02sm13144543pfe.49.2022.03.21.19.42.45 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 21 Mar 2022 19:42:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <8a193154-e840-6c15-13bf-42267ab72807@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2022 11:42:44 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.7.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] mtd: cfi_cmdset_0002: Use chip_ready() for write on S29GL064N Content-Language: en-US To: Vignesh Raghavendra , Miquel Raynal Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Ahmad Fatoum , stable@vger.kernel.org References: <20220316155455.162362-1-ikegami.t@gmail.com> <20220316155455.162362-3-ikegami.t@gmail.com> <20220316182100.6e2e5876@xps13> <01fed0aa-8844-1db9-f167-e7e7944bc092@ti.com> From: Tokunori Ikegami In-Reply-To: <01fed0aa-8844-1db9-f167-e7e7944bc092@ti.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org Hi, On 2022/03/17 19:01, Vignesh Raghavendra wrote: > > On 16/03/22 10:51 pm, Miquel Raynal wrote: >> Hi Tokunori, >> >> ikegami.t@gmail.com wrote on Thu, 17 Mar 2022 00:54:54 +0900: >> >>> As pointed out by this bug report [1], buffered writes are now broken on >>> S29GL064N. This issue comes from a rework which switched from using chip_good() >>> to chip_ready(), because DQ true data 0xFF is read on S29GL064N and an error >>> returned by chip_good(). >> Vignesh, I believe you understand this issue better than I do, can you >> propose an improved commit log? > How about: > > Since commit dfeae1073583("mtd: cfi_cmdset_0002: Change write buffer to > check correct value") buffered writes fail on S29GL064N. This is > because, on S29GL064N, reads return 0xFF at the end of DQ polling for > write completion, where as, chip_good() check expects actual data > written to the last location to be returned post DQ polling completion. > Fix is to revert to using chip_good() for S29GL064N which only checks > for DQ lines to settle down to determine write completion. Fixed the commit message as suggested by the version 5 patch. >>> One way to solve the issue is to revert the change >>> partially to use chip_ready for S29GL064N. >>> >>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/b687c259-6413-26c9-d4c9-b3afa69ea124@pengutronix.de/ >>> >>> Fixes: dfeae1073583("mtd: cfi_cmdset_0002: Change write buffer to check correct value") >>> Signed-off-by: Tokunori Ikegami >>> Tested-by: Ahmad Fatoum >>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org >>> --- >>> drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++---- >>> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.c b/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.c >>> index e68ddf0f7fc0..6c57f85e1b8e 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.c >>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.c >>> @@ -866,6 +866,23 @@ static int __xipram chip_check(struct map_info *map, struct flchip *chip, >>> chip_check(map, chip, addr, &datum); \ >>> }) >>> >>> +static bool __xipram cfi_use_chip_ready_for_write(struct map_info *map) >> At the very least I would call this function: >> cfi_use_chip_ready_for_writes() >> >> Yet, I still don't fully get what chip_ready is versus chip_good. >> >>> +{ >>> + struct cfi_private *cfi = map->fldrv_priv; >>> + >>> + return cfi->mfr == CFI_MFR_AMD && cfi->id == 0x0c01; >>> +} >>> + >>> +static int __xipram chip_good_for_write(struct map_info *map, >>> + struct flchip *chip, unsigned long addr, >>> + map_word expected) >>> +{ >>> + if (cfi_use_chip_ready_for_write(map)) >>> + return chip_ready(map, chip, addr); >> If possible and not too invasive I would definitely add a "quirks" flag >> somewhere instead of this cfi_use_chip_ready_for_write() check. >> >> Anyway, I would move this to the chip_good() implementation directly so >> we partially hide the quirks complexity from the core. > Yeah, unfortunately this driver does not use quirk flags and tends to > hide quirks behind bool functions like above Added the quirks flag as mentioned. Regards, Ikegami > > Regards > Vignesh