Re: [RFC PATCH] mtd: spi-nor: add support to non-uniform SPI NOR flash memories

[Marek Vasut]

On 05/22/2018 07:01 AM, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
> Hi, Marek,

Hi!

> On 05/21/2018 07:59 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 05/21/2018 06:42 PM, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
>>> Hi, Marek,
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>>> This is a transitional patch: non-uniform erase maps will be used
>>>>> later
>>>>> when initialized based on the SFDP data.
>>>>
>>>> What about non-SFDP non-linear flashes ?
>>>
>>> Non-SFDP non-uniform flashes support is not addressed with this
>>> proposal, I should have told this in the commit message, thanks. But we
>>> are backward compatible, if non-SFDP, the flashes are considered
>>> uniform.
>>
>> OK. btw wall-of-text description of patch isn't my fav thing.
>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>
>>>>> [tudor.ambarus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx:
>>>>> - add improvements on how the erase map is handled. The map is an
>>>>> array
>>>>> describing the boundaries of the erase regions. LSB bits of the
>>>>> region's
>>>>> offset are used to describe the supported erase types, to indicate if
>>>>> that specific region is the last region in the map and to mark if the
>>>>> region is overlaid or not. When one sends an addr and len to erase a
>>>>> chunk of memory, we identify in which region the address fits, we
>>>>> start
>>>>> erasing with the best fitted erase commands and when the region ends,
>>>>> continue to erase from the next region. The erase is optimal: identify
>>>>> the start offset (once), then erase with the best erase command,
>>>>> move forward and repeat.
>>>>
>>>> Is that like an R-tree ?
>>>
>>> Not really. I find this RFC proposal faster and neat, but I'm open for
>>> suggestions and guidance.
>>>
>>> One wants to erase a contiguous chunk of memory and sends us the
>>> starting address and the total length. The algorithm of finding the best
>>> sequence of erase commands can be summarized in four steps:
>>>
>>> 1. Find in which region the address fits.
>>> This step is done only once, at the beginning. For the non-uniform
>>> SFDP-defined flashes, usually there are two or three regions defined.
>>> Nevertheless, in the worst case, the maximum number of regions that can
>>> be defined is on eight bits, so 255. Linear search for just 255 elements
>>> in the worst case looks good for me, especially that we do this search
>>> once.
>>>
>>> 2. Find the *best* erase command that is defined in that region.
>>> Each region can define maximum 4 erase commands. *Best* is defined as
>>> the largest/biggest supported erase command with which the provided
>>> address is aligned and which does not erase more that what the user has
>>> asked for. In case of overlaid regions, alignment does not matter. The
>>> largest command will erase the remaining of the overlaid region without
>>> touching the region with which it overlaps (see S25FS512S). The
>>> supported erase commands are ordered by size with the biggest queried
>>> first. It is desirable to erase with large erase commands so that we
>>> erase as much as we can in one shoot, minimizing the erase() calls.
>>>
>>> 3. Erase sector with the *best* erase command and move forward in a
>>> linear fashion.
>>> addr += cmd->size;
>>> len -= cmd->size;
>>> If the new address exceeds the end of this region, move to the next.
>>>
>>> 4. While (len) goto step2.
>>>
>>> That's all. Linearity is an advantage. We find the starting region and
>>> then we traverse each region in order without other queries.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> - order erase types by size, with the biggest erase type at BIT(0).
>>>>> With
>>>>> this, we can iterate from the biggest supported erase type to the
>>>>> smallest,
>>>>> and when find one that meets all the required conditions, break the
>>>>> loop.
>>>>> This saves time in determining the best erase cmd.
>>>>>
>>>>> - minimize the amount of erase() calls by using the best sequence of
>>>>> erase
>>>>> type commands depending on alignment.
>>>>
>>>> Nice, this was long overdue
>>>>
>>>>> - replace spi_nor_find_uniform_erase() with
>>>>> spi_nor_select_uniform_erase().
>>>>> Even for the SPI NOR memories with non-uniform erase types, we can
>>>>> determine
>>>>> at init if there are erase types that can erase the entire memory.
>>>>> Fill at
>>>>> init the uniform_erase_type bitmask, to encode the erase type
>>>>> commands that
>>>>> can erase the entire memory.
>>>>>
>>>>> - clarify support for overlaid regions. Considering one of the erase
>>>>> maps
>>>>> of the S25FS512S memory:
>>>>> Bottom: 8x 4KB sectors at bottom (only 4KB erase supported),
>>>>> ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ 1x overlaid 224KB sector at bottom (only 256KB erase
>>>>> supported),
>>>>> ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ 255x 256KB sectors (only 256KB erase supported)
>>>>> S25FS512S states that 'if a sector erase command is applied to a
>>>>> 256KB range
>>>>> that is overlaid by 4KB secors, the overlaid 4kB sectors are not
>>>>> affected by
>>>>> the erase'. When at init, the overlaid region size should be set to
>>>>> region->size = erase_size - count; in order to not miss chunks of data
>>>>> when traversing the regions.
>>>>>
>>>>> - backward compatibility test done on MX25L25673G.
>>>>>
>>>>> The 'erase with the best command, move forward and repeat' approach
>>>>> was
>>>>> suggested by Cristian Birsan in a brainstorm session, so:
>>>>> ]
>>>>> Suggested-by: Cristian Birsan <cristian.birsan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> ÂÂ drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c | 281
>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>>>>> ÂÂ include/linux/mtd/spi-nor.hÂÂ |Â 89 +++++++++++++
>>>>> ÂÂ 2 files changed, 356 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
>>>>> b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
>>>>> index 494b7a2..bb70664 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
>>>>> @@ -260,6 +260,17 @@ static void spi_nor_set_4byte_opcodes(struct
>>>>> spi_nor *nor,
>>>>> ÂÂÂÂÂÂ nor->read_opcode = spi_nor_convert_3to4_read(nor->read_opcode);
>>>>> ÂÂÂÂÂÂ nor->program_opcode =
>>>>> spi_nor_convert_3to4_program(nor->program_opcode);
>>>>> ÂÂÂÂÂÂ nor->erase_opcode =
>>>>> spi_nor_convert_3to4_erase(nor->erase_opcode);
>>>>> +
>>>>> +ÂÂÂ if (!spi_nor_has_uniform_erase(nor)) {
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ struct spi_nor_erase_map *map = &nor->erase_map;
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ struct spi_nor_erase_command *cmd;
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ int i;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ for (i = 0; i < SNOR_CMD_ERASE_MAX; i++) {
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ cmd = &map->commands[i];
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ cmd->opcode = spi_nor_convert_3to4_erase(cmd->opcode);
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ }
>>>>> +ÂÂÂ }
>>>>> ÂÂ }
>>>>> ÂÂÂÂ /* Enable/disable 4-byte addressing mode. */
>>>>> @@ -497,6 +508,131 @@ static int spi_nor_erase_sector(struct spi_nor
>>>>> *nor, u32 addr)
>>>>> ÂÂÂÂÂÂ return nor->write_reg(nor, nor->erase_opcode, buf,
>>>>> nor->addr_width);
>>>>> ÂÂ }
>>>>> ÂÂ +/* JEDEC JESD216B Standard imposes erase sizes to be power of
>>>>> 2. */
>>>>> +static inline u64
>>>>> +spi_nor_div_by_erase_size(const struct spi_nor_erase_command *cmd,
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ u64 dividend, u32 *remainder)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +ÂÂÂ *remainder = (u32)dividend & cmd->size_mask;
>>>>> +ÂÂÂ return dividend >> cmd->size_shift;
>>>>> +}
>>>>> +
>>>>> +static const struct spi_nor_erase_command *
>>>>> +spi_nor_find_best_erase_cmd(const struct spi_nor_erase_map *map,
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ const struct spi_nor_erase_region *region, u64 addr,
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ u32 len)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +ÂÂÂ const struct spi_nor_erase_command *cmd;
>>>>> +ÂÂÂ u32 rem;
>>>>> +ÂÂÂ int i;
>>>>> +ÂÂÂ u8 cmd_mask = region->offset & SNOR_CMD_ERASE_MASK;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +ÂÂÂ /*
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂ * Commands are ordered by size, with the biggest erase type at
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂ * index 0.
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂ */
>>>>> +ÂÂÂ for (i = 0; i < SNOR_CMD_ERASE_MAX; i++) {
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ /* Does the erase region support the tested erase command? */
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ if (!(cmd_mask & BIT(i)))
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ continue;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ cmd = &map->commands[i];
>>>>> +
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ /* Don't erase more than what the user has asked for. */
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ if (cmd->size > len)
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ continue;
>>>>
>>>> Are you sure checking for the full erase block length first and then
>>>> checking if you can sub-erase the block is OK ?
>>>
>>> will respond in the next comment.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ if (!(region->offset & SNOR_OVERLAID_REGION)) {
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ /* 'addr' must be aligned to the erase size. */
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ spi_nor_div_by_erase_size(cmd, addr, &rem);
>>>
>>> oh, I missed the if here, this should have been confusing.
>>> if (rem)
>>> ÂÂÂÂ continue;
>>> else
>>> ÂÂÂÂ return cmd;
>>> The else case can be merged with the one from below.
>>>
>>> Returning to your previous question. I iterate from the biggest erase
>>> command to the smallest, because bigger is preferred, it will minimize
>>> the amount of erase() calls. The biggest erase command that doesn't
>>> erase more that what the user has asked for, will do. If the region is
>>> not-overlaid the address must also be aligned with the erase size.
>>
>> You can have a flash with 4k sectors which also supports 64k erase and
>> try to erase ie. 128k at offset +4k. That means you need to first erase
>> small chunks, then big chunk, then small chunks again. So I don't think
>> you can start with large chunk to see if you can erase it, since on such
>> a setup the erase will degrade to massive amount of 4k erase ops.
>>
> 
> I'm looking for the biggest supported erase command with which the
> provided address is aligned and which does not erase more that what the
> user has asked for. In your example, 4k erase type will be used until
> reaching the 64k offset, then a 64k erase type, then a 4k type.

That's good!

>> [...]
>>
>>>>> +ÂÂÂ while (len) {
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ cmd = spi_nor_find_best_erase_cmd(map, region, addr, len);
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ if (!cmd)
>>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ return -EINVAL;
>>>>
>>>> What would happen if you realize mid-way that you cannot erase some
>>>> sector , do you end up with partial erase ?
>>>
>>> Is this possible? In non-overlaid regions, the address is aligned with
>>> at least one of the erase commands, else -EINVAL. For overlaid regions
>>> alignment doesn't matter. But yes, if this is possible, in this case,
>>> this proposal will do a partial erase.
>>
>> Shouldn't we fail up front instead ?
> 
> It will be great if we can do this without having performance penalties.
> Can we loose the conditions for the last erase command? If one wants to
> erase 80k chunk starting from offset 0 and only 32k and 64k erase type
> are supported, can we erase 96k?

No. But can you maybe build a list of erase commands to be executed once
you validate that the erase can be performed for example ?

-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut