[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <42380415413178b18e940ae80298c22c51275b95.camel@ew.tq-group.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2021 12:45:34 +0200
From: Matthias Schiffer <matthias.schiffer@...tq-group.com>
To: Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
Cc: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>,
Pratyush Yadav <p.yadav@...com>,
Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mtd: spi-nor: micron-st: sync flags of mt25ql02g
and mt25qu02g with other mt25q
On Tue, 2021-07-27 at 09:09 +0200, Michael Walle wrote:
> Am 2021-07-23 13:27, schrieb Matthias Schiffer:
> > All mt25q variants have the same features.
> >
> > Unlike the smaller variants, no n25q with 2G exists, so we don't need
> > to
> > match on the extended ID to distinguish n25q and mt25q series for these
> > models.
>
> But why shouldn't we? What if there will be another flash with
> the same first three id bytes?
That makes sense, I'll update my patch accordingly.
It looked to me like the current ID list only checks the extended ID
when necessary to distinguish two known flash models.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Matthias Schiffer <matthias.schiffer@...tq-group.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/mtd/spi-nor/micron-st.c | 6 +++---
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/micron-st.c
> > b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/micron-st.c
> > index c224e59820a1..d5baa8762c8d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/micron-st.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/micron-st.c
> > @@ -181,11 +181,11 @@ static const struct flash_info st_parts[] = {
> > SECT_4K | USE_FSR | SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ |
> > NO_CHIP_ERASE) },
> > { "mt25ql02g", INFO(0x20ba22, 0, 64 * 1024, 4096,
> > - SECT_4K | USE_FSR | SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ |
> > - NO_CHIP_ERASE) },
>
> This bothers me. I'm not sure how this will work. I see that
> chip erase is command 0xc7, but both the new and the old flash
> just supports 0xc3 (DIE ERASE). Did you test these changes?
Thanks for catching this. I overlooked that the 1G and 2G variants
don't support the same erase commands as the smaller versions after
all... It is possible that I only tested this with partitioned MTD, so
I didn't hit the whole-chip erase case.
Which command should I use to test the chip erase? Will a `flash_erase
/dev/mtdX 0 0` trigger the correct operation?
>
> > + SECT_4K | USE_FSR | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ |
> > + SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ | SPI_NOR_4B_OPCODES) },
> > { "mt25qu02g", INFO(0x20bb22, 0, 64 * 1024, 4096,
> > SECT_4K | USE_FSR | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ |
> > - SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ | NO_CHIP_ERASE) },
> > + SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ | SPI_NOR_4B_OPCODES) },
> >
> > { "m25p05", INFO(0x202010, 0, 32 * 1024, 2, 0) },
> > { "m25p10", INFO(0x202011, 0, 32 * 1024, 4, 0) },
>
> -michael
Powered by blists - more mailing lists