linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v11 07/10] mtd: spi-nor: Add stacked memories support in spi-nor

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: <e2305642-55f1-4893-bea3-b170ac0a5348@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 6 Dec 2023 14:30:10 +0000
From:   Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>
To:     Amit Kumar Mahapatra <amit.kumar-mahapatra@....com>,
        broonie@...nel.org, pratyush@...nel.org, miquel.raynal@...tlin.com,
        richard@....at, vigneshr@...com, sbinding@...nsource.cirrus.com,
        lee@...nel.org, james.schulman@...rus.com, david.rhodes@...rus.com,
        rf@...nsource.cirrus.com, perex@...ex.cz, tiwai@...e.com
Cc:     linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        michael@...le.cc, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
        nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com, alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com,
        claudiu.beznea@...on.dev, michal.simek@....com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
        patches@...nsource.cirrus.com, linux-sound@...r.kernel.org,
        git@....com, amitrkcian2002@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 07/10] mtd: spi-nor: Add stacked memories support in
 spi-nor

Hi, Amit,

On 11/25/23 09:21, Amit Kumar Mahapatra wrote:
> Each flash that is connected in stacked mode should have a separate
> parameter structure. So, the flash parameter member(*params) of the spi_nor
> structure is changed to an array (*params[2]). The array is used to store
> the parameters of each flash connected in stacked configuration.
> 
> The current implementation assumes that a maximum of two flashes are
> connected in stacked mode and both the flashes are of same make but can
> differ in sizes. So, except the sizes all other flash parameters of both
> the flashes are identical.

Do you plan to add support for different flashes in stacked mode? If
not, wouldn't it be simpler to have just an array of flash sizes instead
of duplicating the entire params struct?

> 
> SPI-NOR is not aware of the chip_select values, for any incoming request
> SPI-NOR will decide the flash index with the help of individual flash size
> and the configuration type (single/stacked). SPI-NOR will pass on the flash
> index information to the SPI core & SPI driver by setting the appropriate
> bit in nor->spimem->spi->cs_index_mask. For example, if nth bit of
> nor->spimem->spi->cs_index_mask is set then the driver would
> assert/de-assert spi->chip_slect[n].
> 
> Signed-off-by: Amit Kumar Mahapatra <amit.kumar-mahapatra@....com>
> ---
>  drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c  | 272 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>  drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.h  |   4 +
>  include/linux/mtd/spi-nor.h |  15 +-
>  3 files changed, 240 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c
> index 93ae69b7ff83..e990be7c7eb6 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c

cut

> @@ -2905,7 +3007,10 @@ static void spi_nor_init_fixup_flags(struct spi_nor *nor)
>  static int spi_nor_late_init_params(struct spi_nor *nor)
>  {
>  	struct spi_nor_flash_parameter *params = spi_nor_get_params(nor, 0);
> -	int ret;
> +	struct device_node *np = spi_nor_get_flash_node(nor);
> +	u64 flash_size[SNOR_FLASH_CNT_MAX];
> +	u32 idx = 0;
> +	int rc, ret;
>  
>  	if (nor->manufacturer && nor->manufacturer->fixups &&
>  	    nor->manufacturer->fixups->late_init) {
> @@ -2937,6 +3042,44 @@ static int spi_nor_late_init_params(struct spi_nor *nor)
>  	if (params->n_banks > 1)
>  		params->bank_size = div64_u64(params->size, params->n_banks);
>  
> +	nor->num_flash = 0;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * The flashes that are connected in stacked mode should be of same make.
> +	 * Except the flash size all other properties are identical for all the
> +	 * flashes connected in stacked mode.
> +	 * The flashes that are connected in parallel mode should be identical.
> +	 */
> +	while (idx < SNOR_FLASH_CNT_MAX) {
> +		rc = of_property_read_u64_index(np, "stacked-memories", idx, &flash_size[idx]);

This is a little late in my opinion, as we don't have any sanity check
on the flashes that are stacked on top of the first. We shall at least
read and compare the ID for all.

Cheers,
ta