Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] mtd: dataflash: Make use of "extened device information"

From: Marek Vasut
Date: Wed Apr 19 2017 - 12:14:00 EST

Next message: Paul E. McKenney: "Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 04/13] rcu: Make RCU_FANOUT_LEAF help text more explicit about skew_tick"
Previous message: Johannes Weiner: "Re: [PATCH -mm -v9 2/3] mm, THP, swap: Check whether THP can be split firstly"
In reply to: Marek Vasut: "Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] mtd: dataflash: Make use of "extened device information""
Next in thread: Andrey Smirnov: "[PATCH v3 2/6] mtd: dataflash: Improve coding style in jedec_probe()"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On 04/19/2017 06:08 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On 04/19/2017 06:01 PM, Andrey Smirnov wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 8:42 AM, Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On 04/19/2017 05:23 PM, Andrey Smirnov wrote:
>>>> In anticipation of supporting chips that need it, extend the size of
>>>> struct flash_info's 'jedec_id' field to make room 2 byte of extended
>>>> device information as well as add code to fetch this data during
>>>> jedec_probe().
>>>>
>>>> Cc: cphealy@xxxxxxxxx
>>>> Cc: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> Cc: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>> Cc: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> Cc: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>> Cc: Richard Weinberger <richard@xxxxxx>
>>>> Cc: Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>> Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrey Smirnov <andrew.smirnov@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> Changes since [v2]:
>>>>
>>>> - Make 'id' have same size as 'jedec'
>>>>
>>>> - Get rid of eid_mask variable in favour of using GENMASK
>>>> in-place
>>>>
>>>> Changes since [v1]:
>>>>
>>>> - Formatting
>>>>
>>>> [v1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170411161722.11164-1-andrew.smirnov@xxxxxxxxx
>>>> [v2] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170418142127.23301-3-andrew.smirnov@xxxxxxxxx
>>>>
>>>> drivers/mtd/devices/mtd_dataflash.c | 115 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------
>>>> 1 file changed, 68 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/devices/mtd_dataflash.c b/drivers/mtd/devices/mtd_dataflash.c
>>>> index 2d3e403..941e8b7 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/mtd/devices/mtd_dataflash.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/devices/mtd_dataflash.c
>>>> @@ -687,7 +687,7 @@ struct flash_info {
>>>> /* JEDEC id has a high byte of zero plus three data bytes:
>>>> * the manufacturer id, then a two byte device id.
>>>> */
>>>> - u32 jedec_id;
>>>> + u64 jedec_id;
>>>>
>>>> /* The size listed here is what works with OP_ERASE_PAGE. */
>>>> unsigned nr_pages;
>>>> @@ -710,62 +710,34 @@ static struct flash_info dataflash_data[] = {
>>>> * These newer chips also support 128-byte security registers (with
>>>> * 64 bytes one-time-programmable) and software write-protection.
>>>> */
>>>> - { "AT45DB011B", 0x1f2200, 512, 264, 9, SUP_POW2PS},
>>>> - { "at45db011d", 0x1f2200, 512, 256, 8, SUP_POW2PS | IS_POW2PS},
>>>> + { "AT45DB011B", 0x1f22000000, 512, 264, 9, SUP_POW2PS},
>>>> + { "at45db011d", 0x1f22000000, 512, 256, 8, SUP_POW2PS | IS_POW2PS},
>>>>
>>>> - { "AT45DB021B", 0x1f2300, 1024, 264, 9, SUP_POW2PS},
>>>> - { "at45db021d", 0x1f2300, 1024, 256, 8, SUP_POW2PS | IS_POW2PS},
>>>> + { "AT45DB021B", 0x1f23000000, 1024, 264, 9, SUP_POW2PS},
>>>> + { "at45db021d", 0x1f23000000, 1024, 256, 8, SUP_POW2PS | IS_POW2PS},
>>>>
>>>> - { "AT45DB041x", 0x1f2400, 2048, 264, 9, SUP_POW2PS},
>>>> - { "at45db041d", 0x1f2400, 2048, 256, 8, SUP_POW2PS | IS_POW2PS},
>>>> + { "AT45DB041x", 0x1f24000000, 2048, 264, 9, SUP_POW2PS},
>>>> + { "at45db041d", 0x1f24000000, 2048, 256, 8, SUP_POW2PS | IS_POW2PS},
>>>>
>>>> - { "AT45DB081B", 0x1f2500, 4096, 264, 9, SUP_POW2PS},
>>>> - { "at45db081d", 0x1f2500, 4096, 256, 8, SUP_POW2PS | IS_POW2PS},
>>>> + { "AT45DB081B", 0x1f25000000, 4096, 264, 9, SUP_POW2PS},
>>>> + { "at45db081d", 0x1f25000000, 4096, 256, 8, SUP_POW2PS | IS_POW2PS},
>>>>
>>>> - { "AT45DB161x", 0x1f2600, 4096, 528, 10, SUP_POW2PS},
>>>> - { "at45db161d", 0x1f2600, 4096, 512, 9, SUP_POW2PS | IS_POW2PS},
>>>> + { "AT45DB161x", 0x1f26000000, 4096, 528, 10, SUP_POW2PS},
>>>> + { "at45db161d", 0x1f26000000, 4096, 512, 9, SUP_POW2PS | IS_POW2PS},
>>>>
>>>> - { "AT45DB321x", 0x1f2700, 8192, 528, 10, 0}, /* rev C */
>>>> + { "AT45DB321x", 0x1f27000000, 8192, 528, 10, 0}, /* rev C */
>>>>
>>>> - { "AT45DB321x", 0x1f2701, 8192, 528, 10, SUP_POW2PS},
>>>> - { "at45db321d", 0x1f2701, 8192, 512, 9, SUP_POW2PS | IS_POW2PS},
>>>> + { "AT45DB321x", 0x1f27010000, 8192, 528, 10, SUP_POW2PS},
>>>> + { "at45db321d", 0x1f27010000, 8192, 512, 9, SUP_POW2PS | IS_POW2PS},
>>>>
>>>> - { "AT45DB642x", 0x1f2800, 8192, 1056, 11, SUP_POW2PS},
>>>> - { "at45db642d", 0x1f2800, 8192, 1024, 10, SUP_POW2PS | IS_POW2PS},
>>>> + { "AT45DB642x", 0x1f28000000, 8192, 1056, 11, SUP_POW2PS},
>>>> + { "at45db642d", 0x1f28000000, 8192, 1024, 10, SUP_POW2PS | IS_POW2PS},
>>>> };
>>>>
>>>> -static struct flash_info *jedec_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
>>>> +static struct flash_info *jedec_lookup(struct spi_device *spi, u64 jedec)
>>>> {
>>>> - int ret;
>>>> - u8 code = OP_READ_ID;
>>>> - u8 id[3];
>>>> - u32 jedec;
>>>> - struct flash_info *info;
>>>> int status;
>>>> -
>>>> - /*
>>>> - * JEDEC also defines an optional "extended device information"
>>>> - * string for after vendor-specific data, after the three bytes
>>>> - * we use here. Supporting some chips might require using it.
>>>> - *
>>>> - * If the vendor ID isn't Atmel's (0x1f), assume this call failed.
>>>> - * That's not an error; only rev C and newer chips handle it, and
>>>> - * only Atmel sells these chips.
>>>> - */
>>>> - ret = spi_write_then_read(spi, &code, 1, id, 3);
>>>> - if (ret < 0) {
>>>> - dev_dbg(&spi->dev, "error %d reading JEDEC ID\n", ret);
>>>> - return ERR_PTR(ret);
>>>> - }
>>>> -
>>>> - if (id[0] != CFI_MFR_ATMEL)
>>>> - return NULL;
>>>> -
>>>> - jedec = id[0];
>>>> - jedec = jedec << 8;
>>>> - jedec |= id[1];
>>>> - jedec = jedec << 8;
>>>> - jedec |= id[2];
>>>> + struct flash_info *info;
>>>>
>>>> for (info = dataflash_data;
>>>> info < dataflash_data + ARRAY_SIZE(dataflash_data);
>>>> @@ -793,12 +765,61 @@ static struct flash_info *jedec_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> + return NULL;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static struct flash_info *jedec_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
>>>> +{
>>>> + int ret;
>>>> + u8 code = OP_READ_ID;
>>>> + u64 jedec;
>>>> + u8 id[sizeof(jedec)] = {0};
>>>> + const unsigned int id_size = 5;
>>>> + const unsigned int first_byte = sizeof(id) - id_size;
>>>> + struct flash_info *info;
>>>> +
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * JEDEC also defines an optional "extended device information"
>>>> + * string for after vendor-specific data, after the three bytes
>>>> + * we use here. Supporting some chips might require using it.
>>>> + *
>>>> + * If the vendor ID isn't Atmel's (0x1f), assume this call failed.
>>>> + * That's not an error; only rev C and newer chips handle it, and
>>>> + * only Atmel sells these chips.
>>>> + */
>>>> + ret = spi_write_then_read(spi, &code, 1, &id[first_byte], id_size);
>>>
>>> Hm, looking at this again, what prevents you from reading these bytes
>>> into &id[0] ? Might be easier, ie.
>>>
>>> ret = spi_write_then_read(spi, &code, 1, id, id_size);
>>>
>>
>> Then I'd have to add 6 more '0's to each of the IDs in dataflash_data,
>> which would make that code even less readable.
>
> Or do >>= 24 on the jedec ID :)

In fact, you can use the flags field to introduce a flag to indicate
that the flash uses ext ID . Then the lookup function can do first try
the ext IDs (with correct shift) and then standard IDs (with correct
bitshift again).

Upside is, you don't need to patch the table above at all, you just add
your new flash with another flag , ie. SUP_EXTID .

>>>> + if (ret < 0) {
>>>> + pr_debug("%s: error %d reading JEDEC ID\n",
>>>> + dev_name(&spi->dev), ret);
>>>> + return ERR_PTR(ret);
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + if (id[first_byte] != CFI_MFR_ATMEL)
>>>
>>> if (id[0] != CFI_MFR_ATMEL)
>>>
>>>> + return NULL;
>>>> +
>>>> + jedec = be64_to_cpup((__be64 *)id);
>>>> +
>>>> + info = jedec_lookup(spi, jedec);
>>>
>>> ... define these somewhere at the beginning of the dataflash code ...
>>> #define DATAFLASH_MASK_STD GENMASK(63, 40)
>>> #define DATAFLASH_MASK_EXT GENMASK(63, 16)
>>>
>>> ... then ...
>>> info = jedec_lookup(spi, jedec & DATAFLASH_MASK_EXT);
>>>
>>>> + if (info)
>>>> + return info;
>>>> +
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * Clear extended id bits (bits 0 through 15) and try to find
>>>> + * a match again in case our chip does not support returning
>>>> + * extended ID information and we got invalid bits instead
>>>> + */
>>>> + jedec &= GENMASK_ULL(63, 16);
>>>
>>> info = jedec_lookup(spi, jedec & DATAFLASH_MASK_STD);
>>>
>>
>> Sure, OK.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Andrey Smirnov
>>
>
>

--
Best regards,
Marek Vasut

Next message: Paul E. McKenney: "Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 04/13] rcu: Make RCU_FANOUT_LEAF help text more explicit about skew_tick"
Previous message: Johannes Weiner: "Re: [PATCH -mm -v9 2/3] mm, THP, swap: Check whether THP can be split firstly"
In reply to: Marek Vasut: "Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] mtd: dataflash: Make use of "extened device information""
Next in thread: Andrey Smirnov: "[PATCH v3 2/6] mtd: dataflash: Improve coding style in jedec_probe()"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]