[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fdc0519b-be51-4ad6-a224-02733b09bd77@atmel.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 11:35:03 +0100
From: Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@...el.com>
To: Andy Yan <andy.yan@...k-chips.com>, <marek.vasut@...il.com>
CC: <dwmw2@...radead.org>, <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
<boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>, <richard@....at>,
<linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: spi-nor: add support for GD25Q256
Hi Andy,
Le 14/02/2017 à 01:36, Andy Yan a écrit :
> GD25Q256 is a 32MiB SPI Nor flash from Gigadevice.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andy Yan <andy.yan@...k-chips.com>
> ---
> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c | 8 ++++++--
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> mode change 100644 => 100755 drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
> old mode 100644
> new mode 100755
> index da7cd69..0917dd3
> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
> @@ -852,6 +852,10 @@ static const struct flash_info spi_nor_ids[] = {
> SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ |
> SPI_NOR_HAS_LOCK | SPI_NOR_HAS_TB)
> },
> + {
> + "gd25q256", INFO(0xc84019, 0, 64 * 1024, 512,
> + SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ)
> + },
>
> /* Intel/Numonyx -- xxxs33b */
> { "160s33b", INFO(0x898911, 0, 64 * 1024, 32, 0) },
> @@ -1483,7 +1487,8 @@ int spi_nor_scan(struct spi_nor *nor, const char *name, enum read_mode mode)
> else if (mtd->size > 0x1000000) {
> /* enable 4-byte addressing if the device exceeds 16MiB */
> nor->addr_width = 4;
> - if (JEDEC_MFR(info) == SNOR_MFR_SPANSION) {
> + if (JEDEC_MFR(info) == SNOR_MFR_SPANSION ||
> + JEDEC_MFR(info) == SNOR_MFR_GIGADEVICE) {
> /* Dedicated 4-byte command set */
> switch (nor->flash_read) {
> case SPI_NOR_QUAD:
This doesn't apply to the spi-nor tree and also, please use the
SPI_NOR_4B_OPCODES info->flags instead of adding a "JEDEC_MFR(info) ==
SNOR_MFR_GIGADEVICE" line.
I think setting flags at the memory part level is safer than applying a
global policy per manufacturer.
Best regards,
Cyrille
> @@ -1519,7 +1524,6 @@ int spi_nor_scan(struct spi_nor *nor, const char *name, enum read_mode mode)
>
> dev_info(dev, "%s (%lld Kbytes)\n", info->name,
> (long long)mtd->size >> 10);
> -
> dev_dbg(dev,
> "mtd .name = %s, .size = 0x%llx (%lldMiB), "
> ".erasesize = 0x%.8x (%uKiB) .numeraseregions = %d\n",
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists