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: <CANeKEMNJ3_ET5pQo2wg7_GSLX+vE+dqW-CV=v2DnG10xcgSdzQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2024 20:57:57 +0200
From: Erez <erezgeva2@...il.com>
To: Esben Haabendal <esben@...nix.com>
Cc: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>, Jaime Liao <jaimeliao@...c.com.tw>, leoyu@...c.com.tw, 
	Alvin Zhou <alvinzhou@...c.com.tw>, Julien Su <juliensu@...c.com.tw>, 
	Erez Geva <erezgeva@...ime.org>, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, 
	Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@...nel.org>, Michael Walle <mwalle@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>, Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>, 
	Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] dt-bindings: mtd: macronix,mx25l12833f: add
 SPI-NOR chip

Yes, I think we should.

Reading the specification provided publicly by Macronix.
For all the JEDEC IDs with the no SFDP flag in drivers/mtd/spi-nor/macronix.c
All of them have a new version or a new chip with the same JEDEC ID
that supports SFDP.
There are 2 chips that Macronix does not provide spec. in public.
I can ask Macronix technical support on these 2 chips.

Erez

"RDID"    "Part."         "Size"              "Status"          "SFDP
status according to spec. or new chip replacing with same RDID and
SFDP supported according to spec."
c22012  MX25L2005(A)  SZ_256K =  2Mb    EOL             MX25L2006E
c22013  MX25L4005A    SZ_512K =  4Mb    EOL             MX25L4006E
c22533  MX25U4035     SZ_512K =  4Mb    EOL             MX25U4033E
c22534  MX25U8035     SZ_1M   =  8Mb    EOL             MX25U8033E
c22016  MX25L3205D    SZ_4M   =  32Mb   EOL             MX25L3233F
c22017  MX25L6405D    SZ_8M   =  64Mb   EOL             MX25L6406E / MX25L6433F
c22018  MX25L12805D   SZ_16M  =  128Mb  EOL             MX25L12833F
c22538  MX25U12835F   SZ_16M  =  128Mb  EOL             MX25U12832F
c2253a  MX66U51235F   SZ_64M  =  512Mb  EOL             MX25U51245G
c22532  MX25U2033E    SZ_256K =  2Mb    EOL             Have-SFDP!
c22010  MX25L512E     SZ_64K  =  512Kb  NO_REC          Have-SFDP!
c22015  MX25L1606E    SZ_2M   =  16Mb   NO_REC          Have-SFDP!
c22536  MX25U3235F    SZ_4M   =  32Mb   NO_REC          Have-SFDP!
c22816  MX25R3235F    SZ_4M   =  32Mb   NO_REC          Have-SFDP!
c22537  MX25U6435F    SZ_8M   =  64Mb   NO_REC          Have-SFDP!
c22019  MX25L25635E   SZ_32M  =  256Mb  NO_REC          Have-SFDP!
c22539  MX25U25635F   SZ_32M  =  256Mb  NO_REC          Have-SFDP!
c2201a  MX66L51235F   SZ_64M  =  512Mb  NO_REC          Have-SFDP!
c2253a  MX25U51245G   SZ_64M  =  512Mb  PROD            Have-SFDP!
c22314  MX25V8035F    SZ_1M   =  8Mb    PROD            Have-SFDP!
c22815  MX25R1635F    SZ_2M   =  16Mb   PROD            Have-SFDP!
c2201b  MX66L1G45G    SZ_128M =  1Gb    PROD            Have-SFDP!
c2253c  MX66U2G45G    SZ_256M =  2Gb    PROD            Have-SFDP!
c2261b  MX66L1G55G    SZ_128M =  1Gb    NO_REC          Spec. is not public
c29e16  MX25L3255E    SZ_4M   =  32Mb   PROD            Spec. is not public

EOL     End of Life
PROD    Production
NO_REC  Not recommend


On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 at 16:34, Esben Haabendal <esben@...nix.com> wrote:
>
> Erez <erezgeva2@...il.com> writes:
>
> > On Wed, 3 Jul 2024 at 09:12, Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org> wrote:
> >> On 7/3/24 12:16 AM, Erez wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 2 Jul 2024 at 07:00, Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> The table below uses fixed width characters.
> >>>
> >>> ID      Part.         Size              Status          SFDP status
> >>> according to spec.
> >>>                                                         New chip with
> >>> SFDP for EOL
> >>> c22012  MX25L2005(A)  SZ_256K =  2Mb    EOL             MX25L2006E
> >>> c22532  MX25U2033E    SZ_256K =  2Mb    EOL
> >>> c22013  MX25L4005A    SZ_512K =  4Mb    EOL
> >>> c22533  MX25U4035     SZ_512K =  4Mb    EOL
> >>> c22534  MX25U8035     SZ_1M   =  8Mb    EOL
> >>> c22016  MX25L3205D    SZ_4M   =  32Mb   EOL             MX25L3233F
> >>> c29e16  MX25L3255E    SZ_4M   =  32Mb   EOL
> >>> c22017  MX25L6405D    SZ_8M   =  64Mb   EOL
> >>> c22018  MX25L12805D   SZ_16M  =  128Mb  EOL             MX25L12833F
> >>> c22538  MX25U12835F   SZ_16M  =  128Mb  EOL
> >>> c2253a  MX66U51235F   SZ_64M  =  512Mb  EOL             MX25U51245G
> >>> c22010  MX25L512E     SZ_64K  =  512Kb  NO_REC          Have-SFDP!
> >>> c22015  MX25L1606E    SZ_2M   =  16Mb   NO_REC          Have-SFDP!
> >>> c22536  MX25U3235F    SZ_4M   =  32Mb   NO_REC          Have-SFDP!
> >>> c22816  MX25R3235F    SZ_4M   =  32Mb   NO_REC          Have-SFDP!
> >>> c22537  MX25U6435F    SZ_8M   =  64Mb   NO_REC          Have-SFDP!
> >>> c22019  MX25L25635E   SZ_32M  =  256Mb  NO_REC          Have-SFDP!
> >>> c22539  MX25U25635F   SZ_32M  =  256Mb  NO_REC          Have-SFDP!
> >>> c2201a  MX66L51235F   SZ_64M  =  512Mb  NO_REC          Have-SFDP!
> >>> c2261b  MX66L1G55G    SZ_128M =  1Gb    NO_REC          Spec. is not public
> >>> c22314  MX25V8035F    SZ_1M   =  8Mb    PROD            Have-SFDP!
> >>> c22815  MX25R1635F    SZ_2M   =  16Mb   PROD            Have-SFDP!
> >>> c2201b  MX66L1G45G    SZ_128M =  1Gb    PROD            Have-SFDP!
> >>> c2253c  MX66U2G45G    SZ_256M =  2Gb    PROD            Have-SFDP!
> >>> c2253a  MX25U51245G   SZ_64M  =  512Mb  PROD            Have-SFDP!
> >>>
> >>> EOL     End of Life
> >>> PROD    Normal Production
> >>> NO_REC  Not recommend for new design
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> not sure what you want me to do with these.
> >
> > That we can read SFDP for all chips from Macronix.
> > Only old chips before 2010 do not have SFDP.
>
> So, should we try and identify new chips (with SFDP) that re-use the ID of all the
> above mentioned EOL chips that does not have SFDP?
>
> As I read the communication from Macronix, then we should expect new
> chips re-using the ID for all of them. It is just a matter of digging.
>
> /Esben

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ