Re: [PATCH RFC 2/3] mtd: rawnand: Add support Macronix Block Protection function
From: masonccyang
Date: Mon Oct 21 2019 - 04:41:04 EST
Hi Boris,
> > > > > > Then fill-in these two hooks from the manufacturer code,
without
> > the
> > > > > > postponed init.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > But in the final of nand_scan_tail(), mtd->_lock/_unlock will be
> > > > > filled by NULL, right ?
> > > >
> > > > The NAND core should set mtd->_lock/_unlock() to NAND specific
hooks
> > so
> > > > that the MTD layer is abstracted and and drivers do not see it.
Then,
> > > > in the NAND helper, either there is no specific hook defined by a
> > > > manufacturer driver and you return -ENOTSUPP, or you execute the
> > > > defined hook.
> > >
> > > okay, patch specific manufacturer _lock/_unlock driver
> > > in nand_manufacturer_init();
> > >
> > > and in the final of nand_scan_tail()
> > > if (!mtd->_lock)
> > > mtd->_lock = NULL;
> > > if (!mtd->_unlock)
> > > mtd->_unlock = NULL;
> >
> >
> > I'm still considering of post_init() in nand_scan_tail() for
> > MTD layer default call-back function replacement because
> > there would be more call-back functions need it.
> > i.e.,
> > MTD->_lock/_unlokc
> > MTD->_suspend/_resume
>
> Again, that's something that needs to be abstracted so that both the
> NAND manufacturer driver and the NAND controller driver can take
> appropriate actions on suspend/resume operations.
>
> > NTD->_point/_unpoint
>
> ->_point/_unpoint() are irrelevant for a NAND chip.
>
> > ...
> >
> >
> > actually, my patch series are including MTD->_locl/_unlock and
> > MTD->_suspend/_resume. how do you think ?
>
> Miquel was suggesting to add nand_chip->{lock,unlock,is_locked}()
> methods that would be implemented by the NAND manufacturer drivers, and
> have generic wrappers implemented in nand_base.c:
>
> static int nand_lock(struct mtd_info *mtd, loff_t ofs, uint64_t len)
> {
> struct nand_chip *chip = mtd_to_nand(mtd);
>
> if (!chip->lock)
> return -ENOTSUPP;
>
> return chip->lock(chip, ofs, len);
> }
>
> ...
>
> If you do that, you won't need this post_init() hook.
got it, but ...
user space program flash_lock/flash_unlock are calling
mtd_lock() & mtd_unlock().
i.e.,
int mtd_lock(struct mtd_info *mtd, loff_t ofs, uint64_t len)
{
if (!mtd->_lock)
return -EOPNOTSUPP;
if (ofs < 0 || ofs >= mtd->size || len > mtd->size - ofs)
return -EINVAL;
if (!len)
return 0;
return mtd->_lock(mtd, ofs, len);
}
thanks for your time & comments.
Mason
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE:
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential information
and/or personal data, which is protected by applicable laws. Please be
reminded that duplication, disclosure, distribution, or use of this e-mail
(and/or its attachments) or any part thereof is prohibited. If you receive
this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately and delete this mail as
well as its attachment(s) from your system. In addition, please be
informed that collection, processing, and/or use of personal data is
prohibited unless expressly permitted by personal data protection laws.
Thank you for your attention and cooperation.
Macronix International Co., Ltd.
=====================================================================
============================================================================
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE:
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential information and/or personal data, which is protected by applicable laws. Please be reminded that duplication, disclosure, distribution, or use of this e-mail (and/or its attachments) or any part thereof is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately and delete this mail as well as its attachment(s) from your system. In addition, please be informed that collection, processing, and/or use of personal data is prohibited unless expressly permitted by personal data protection laws. Thank you for your attention and cooperation.
Macronix International Co., Ltd.
=====================================================================