linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] [v3]mtd: spi-nor: winbond: add 1.8v SPI NOR Flash IDs

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <172b3f0b-9341-7f44-b855-1c353e321e2d@microchip.com>
Date:   Wed, 1 Jul 2020 08:41:52 +0000
From:   <Tudor.Ambarus@...rochip.com>
To:     <wuxy@...land.com.cn>, <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <drinkcat@...omium.org>,
        <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>, <stlin2@...bond.com>,
        <vigneshr@...com>
CC:     <wuxy@...land.corp-partner.google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [v3]mtd: spi-nor: winbond: add 1.8v SPI NOR Flash IDs

On 5/28/20 6:36 AM, wuxy@...land.com.cn wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> 
> From: wuxy <wuxy@...land.corp-partner.google.com>
> 
> Winbond has new 1.8V SPI NOR Flash IDs,we need to use the SPI
> flash IDs in kukui series,this patch can support the new flash IDs.

Which flashes were tested?

One should do a read, dump the content, erase, dump content to check that
erase was fine, write a random generated file, read back and compare.

I see that you added the locking flags too. Were the locking ops tested?

We don't add flashes or caps that are not tested, please specify in the
commit message what was tested.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Xingyu Wu <wuxy@...land.corp-partner.google.com>
> Signed-off-by: ST Lin <stlin2@...bond.com>
> Test-by: Nicolas Boichat <drinkcat@...omium.org>
> 
> ---
> This patch copied from:https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1150756/,
> The original patch is invalid,so re-submit a new patch for this.
>  drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c | 9 +++++++++
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
> index 17deabad57e1..cda4f8847bd6 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
> @@ -61,6 +61,15 @@ static const struct flash_info winbond_parts[] = {
>                              SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ) },
>         { "w25m512jv", INFO(0xef7119, 0, 64 * 1024, 1024,
>                             SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ) },
> +       { "w25q64jwxxIM", INFO(0xef8017, 0, 64 * 1024, 128,

We don't really care about the Package Type, it does not change the flash
caps, we can drop "xx" from the name. Also, the manufacturer can introduce
new flashes with different temperature ranges without changing the
flash caps, so we should drop the "I" from the name too.

The flash name would become w25q64jwm

> +                           SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ |
> +                           SPI_NOR_HAS_LOCK | SPI_NOR_HAS_TB) },
> +       { "w25q128jwxxIM", INFO(0xef8018, 0, 64 * 1024, 256,

w25q128jwm

> +                           SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ |
> +                           SPI_NOR_HAS_LOCK | SPI_NOR_HAS_TB) },
> +       { "w25q256jwxxIM", INFO(0xef8019, 0, 64 * 1024, 512,

w25q256jwm

> +                           SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ |
> +                           SPI_NOR_HAS_LOCK | SPI_NOR_HAS_TB) },

w25q256jwm has 4 block protection bits, locking was not tested for this flash.

Cheers,
ta