[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220331190402.d3fymx3msnzyycef@ti.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2022 00:34:02 +0530
From: Pratyush Yadav <p.yadav@...com>
To: Nathan Rossi <nathan@...hanrossi.com>
CC: <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Nathan Rossi <nathan.rossi@...i.com>,
Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>,
Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: spi-nor: core: Fix 16bit write sr_and_check status
check
Hi Nathan,
On 24/03/22 07:00AM, Nathan Rossi wrote:
> From: Nathan Rossi <nathan.rossi@...i.com>
>
> The spi_nor_write_16bit_sr_and_check function description describes that
> the function compares the value of the status and config registers after
> the write. However the function does not implement the status register
> compare only the config register check.
>
> This causes the function to differ in behaviour to the equivalent
> spi_nor_write_sr1_and_check for non-16bit writes to the status register.
> This is important as other functions rely on the return code of
> spi_nor_write_sr_and_check. For example spi_nor_sr_unlock returns the
> result directly, which is returned to userspace such that failing to
> unlock the spi-nor device was resulting in a return code of 0 instead of
> the expected non-zero indicating the failure.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nathan Rossi <nathan.rossi@...i.com>
> ---
> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c | 9 +++++++++
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c
> index 04ea180118..d75d4f8a45 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c
> @@ -1007,6 +1007,15 @@ static int spi_nor_write_16bit_sr_and_check(struct spi_nor *nor, u8 sr1)
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> + ret = spi_nor_read_sr(nor, sr_cr);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + if (sr1 != sr_cr[0]) {
> + dev_dbg(nor->dev, "SR: read back test failed\n");
> + return -EIO;
> + }
> +
> if (nor->flags & SNOR_F_NO_READ_CR)
> return 0;
This patch seems exactly like [0]. I will pick that one if it applies on
the current tree since it already has one Reviewed-by.
[0] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mtd/20220126073227.3401275-1-chentsung@chromium.org/
--
Regards,
Pratyush Yadav
Texas Instruments Inc.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists