[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120321174919.GA22498@pengutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 18:49:19 +0100
From: Wolfram Sang <w.sang@...gutronix.de>
To: Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>
Cc: Ivo Sieben <meltedpianoman@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...prootsystems.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Support M95040 SPI EEPROM
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:30:22AM -0700, Chris Wright wrote:
> * Ivo Sieben (meltedpianoman@...il.com) wrote:
> > Updated the generic SPI EEPROM driver AT25 for support of address bit A8
> > in the instruction byte. Certain EEPROMS (like M95040 from ST) have a 512
> > Byte size but use only one address byte (A0 to A7) for addressing. For the
> > extra address bit A8 bit 3 of the instruction byte is used. This instruction
> > bit is threated as don't care for other AT25 like chips
>
> The AT25 datasheet lists that bit in READ and PROGRAM(write) as don't
> care, and the MV950x0 datasheet says just what you've said above (BTW,
> it's "treated" not "threated"). How confident are you that this logic
> will not cause problems for existing non-MV95040 chips?
I was thinking the same. We should not make this behaviour default, but
optional. My idea would be another flag, i.e. EE_INSTR_BIT3_IS_ADDR. I'd think
the code could then also easily be written in a way, that it gives 17 and 25
bit addresses for free.
Regards,
Wolfram
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (199 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists