[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2a34630d-1159-e678-1596-035328f412aa@microchip.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 08:49:01 +0000
From: <Tudor.Ambarus@...rochip.com>
To: <p.yadav@...com>
CC: <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>, <richard@....at>, <vigneshr@...com>,
<linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<nsekhar@...com>, <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 03/15] mtd: spi-nor: add support for DTR protocol
On 10/1/20 11:37 AM, Pratyush Yadav wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
>
> On 01/10/20 07:46AM, Tudor.Ambarus@...rochip.com wrote:
>> On 9/30/20 9:57 PM, Pratyush Yadav wrote:
>>> @@ -2387,12 +2496,16 @@ spi_nor_spimem_adjust_hwcaps(struct spi_nor
>>> *nor, u32 *hwcaps)
>>> struct spi_nor_flash_parameter *params = nor->params;
>>> unsigned int cap;
>>>
>>> - /* DTR modes are not supported yet, mask them all. */
>>> - *hwcaps &= ~SNOR_HWCAPS_DTR;
>>> -
>>> /* X-X-X modes are not supported yet, mask them all. */
>>> *hwcaps &= ~SNOR_HWCAPS_X_X_X;
>>>
>>> + /*
>>> + * If the reset line is broken, we do not want to enter a stateful
>>> + * mode.
>>> + */
>>> + if (nor->flags & SNOR_F_BROKEN_RESET)
>>> + *hwcaps &= ~(SNOR_HWCAPS_X_X_X | SNOR_HWCAPS_X_X_X_DTR);
>>
>> SNOR_HWCAPS_X_X_X is already masked out above. Do we need to do it again?
>
> That might change later and the person removing that line might not
> remember or even know to add it back here.
ok
Powered by blists - more mailing lists