[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210402082031.19055-1-tudor.ambarus@microchip.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2021 11:20:29 +0300
From: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>
To: <michael@...le.cc>, <p.yadav@...com>, <vigneshr@...com>,
<masonccyang@...c.com.tw>, <zhengxunli@...c.com.tw>,
<ycllin@...c.com.tw>, <juliensu@...c.com.tw>
CC: <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>, <richard@....at>,
<linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Tudor Ambarus" <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>
Subject: [PATCH 0/2] mtd: spi-nor: macronix: mx25l51245g, mx66l51235l and mx66l51235f
mx25l51245g and mx66l51235l have the same flash ID. The flash
detection returns the first entry in the flash_info array that
matches the flash ID that was read, thus for the 0xc2201a ID,
mx25l51245g was always hit, introducing a regression for
mx66l51235l. Revert mx25l51245g addition. A solution for these
flashes to coexist was proposed.
According to macronix website, there is no mx66l51235l part number.
Rename the part to mx66l51235f.
The difference betwenn mx25l51245g and mx66l51235f flash_info entries
was that mx25l51245g also set SECT_4K. Both flashes support 4K erases,
but the 4K erase should be discovered when parsing BFPT, so there's
no need to set the explicit SECT_4K flag.
Tudor Ambarus (2):
Revert "mtd: spi-nor: macronix: Add support for mx25l51245g"
mtd: spi-nor: macronix: Fix name for mx66l51235f
drivers/mtd/spi-nor/macronix.c | 5 +----
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
--
2.25.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists