[U-Boot] [PATCH] MTD: Add support for S25FL032P spi nor-flash

[David Jander <david.jander@protonic.nl>]

On Tuesday 24 August 2010 06:06:26 pm Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 24, 2010 02:39:16 David Jander wrote:
> > On Monday 23 August 2010 06:31:26 pm Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > On Monday, August 23, 2010 09:12:16 David Jander wrote:
> > > > +	{
> > > > +		.idcode1 = SPSN_ID_S25FL032A,
> > > > +		.idcode2 = SPSN_EXT_ID_S25FL032P,
> > > > +		.idmask2 = 0xff00,
> > >
> > > what does the idcode2 look like such that you need a mask ?
> >
> > According to the datasheet the RDID command (0x9f) returns the following
> > bytes:
> >
> > byte 0: Manufacturer ID = 0x01
> > byte 1,2: Device ID = 0x02, 0x15 (same as S25FL032A)
> > byte 3: Extended ID = 0x4d
> > byte 4,5,6: Spansion reserved (do not use).
> >
> > byte 4 is read as 0x00 on my part, but due to the above explaination, I
> > cannot say for sure it is always the same, so I had to implement a mask
> > to check for it.
> 
> i'd rather we delay adding code to support something that may never change.
> so drop the whole idmask2 stuff and wait for it to become an actual problem
> -mike

I agree that chances this ever breaks might seem rather tiny, but if it ever 
does break, waiting for it to happen could trigger a much bigger problem than 
it is to add these few lines; in the worst case, in some distant future, some 
boards will just not work for no apparent reason (if spansion decided to do 
something with byte 4 without notifying), and nobody will remember this 
discussion anymore...

OTOH, you decide. It's ok with me if you want to leave it out. Given the fact 
that you had already accepted this patch, should I send a new version (without 
the mask)?

Best regards,

-- 
David Jander
Protonic Holland.