linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] mtd: spinand: add support for detection with param page

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

Message-ID: <CAJsYDVKbm+X8ARkgH6z9T0JaZ=cYkG+_3m-dtsbgAwWCrZeO8A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 15 Apr 2022 15:28:57 +0800
From:   Chuanhong Guo <gch981213@...il.com>
To:     Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>
Cc:     linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
        Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
        Patrice Chotard <patrice.chotard@...s.st.com>,
        Christophe Kerello <christophe.kerello@...s.st.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Palmer <daniel@...f.com>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] mtd: spinand: add support for detection with param page

Hi!

On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 3:01 PM Boris Brezillon
<boris.brezillon@...labora.com> wrote:
> +#define SPINAND_IDR_EN BIT(6)

Looks like you're redefining CFG_OTP_ENABLE, why not use that
definition directly?

Oh. I didn't know that was available. I'll use it.
(IDR_EN comes from a toshiba datasheet if I remember correctly.)

>
> On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 11:48:43 +0800
> Chuanhong Guo <gch981213@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > +
> > +static const struct spinand_manufacturer *spinand_onfi_manufacturers[] = {};
>
> Do we really need a separate manufacturer array? Looks like we could
> re-use the one we have in core.c and do the matching against it (we
> just need an extra NULL sentinel to detect the end of this array).

I'll do it.
I'll also add a onfi_nchips to spinand_manufacturer to share the same
manufacturer entry between two types of ID list.

>
> > +
> > +static const struct spinand_onfi_info *
> > +spinand_onfi_chip_match(struct nand_onfi_params *p,
> > +                     const struct spinand_manufacturer *m)
> > +{
> > +     size_t i, j;
> > +
> > +     for (i = 0; i < m->nchips; i++)
> > +             for (j = 0; m->onfi_chips[i].models[j]; j++)
> > +                     if (!strcasecmp(m->onfi_chips[i].models[j], p->model))
> > +                             return &m->onfi_chips[i];
> > +     return NULL;
> > +}
>
> > +/**
> > + * struct spinand_onfi_info - Structure used to describe SPI NAND with ONFI
> > + *                         parameter page
> > + * @models: Model name array. Null terminated.
> > + * @flags: OR-ing of the SPINAND_XXX flags
> > + * @eccinfo: on-die ECC info
> > + * @op_variants: operations variants
> > + * @op_variants.read_cache: variants of the read-cache operation
> > + * @op_variants.write_cache: variants of the write-cache operation
> > + * @op_variants.update_cache: variants of the update-cache operation
> > + * @select_target: function used to select a target/die. Required only for
> > + *              multi-die chips
> > + *
> > + * Each SPI NAND manufacturer driver should have a spinand_onfi_info table
> > + * describing all the chips supported by the driver.
> > + */
> > +struct spinand_onfi_info {
> > +     const char **const models;
> > +     u32 flags;
> > +     struct spinand_ecc_info eccinfo;
> > +     struct {
> > +             const struct spinand_op_variants *read_cache;
> > +             const struct spinand_op_variants *write_cache;
> > +             const struct spinand_op_variants *update_cache;
> > +     } op_variants;
> > +     int (*select_target)(struct spinand_device *spinand,
> > +                          unsigned int target);
> > +};
>
> Can't we just extend spinand_info instead of defining a new struct.

Yeah, that's better. I'll do it.

> AFAICT, the only difference is that model is replaced by a model array,
> and devid is dropped, and I think we can rework the existing ID-based
> matching logic to return ->models[0] instead of ->model.

In fact we don't even use this model string anywhere at the moment.

-- 
Regards,
Chuanhong Guo