From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de>
Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 14:09:51 +0200
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] cfi_flash: don't hide write/erase errors
In-Reply-To: <20141006113229.GC4299@sapphire.tkos.co.il>
References: <d4639ffb4c3a7ec8391e3c2eea7d13b32d55094e.1409822589.git.baruch@tkos.co.il>
	<20141006061901.GD2567@sapphire.tkos.co.il>
	<543250DB.9010402@denx.de>
	<20141006113229.GC4299@sapphire.tkos.co.il>
Message-ID: <5432868F.9000604@denx.de>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

On 06.10.2014 13:32, Baruch Siach wrote:

>> Could you please summarize again, what the real problem with this compare
>> is. What is the error exactly in your case (which flash chip is used and
>> which command was issued?)?
>
> The Micron StrataFlash datasheet says this on Status Register bit 7 (Device
> status):
>
> 0 = Device is busy; SR[9,8,6:1] are invalid, SR[0] is valid
> 1 = Device is ready; SR[9:8], SR[6:1] are valid
>
> This is was the original code behaviour, since your commit
> 79b4cda076069d04122f. This commit log explicitly says:
>
>      * Changes/fixes for drivers/cfi_flash.c:
>        We *should* check if there are any error bits if the previous call
>        returned ERR_OK (Otherwise we will have output an error message in
>        flash_status_check() already.)  The original code would only check for
>        error bits if flash_status_check() returns ERR_TIMEOUT.
>        Patch by Marcus Hall, 23 Aug 2005
>
> Currently U-Boot is just silent about NOR flash write errors.

Okay. Thanks for the summary. I'll prepare a pull request.

Thanks,
Stefan