On Wednesday, April 15, 2020 4:48:30 PM EEST Mantas Pucka wrote:
EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the
content is safe
There are 2 different chips (w25q256fv and w25q256jv) that share
the same JEDEC ID. Only w25q256jv fully supports 4-byte opcodes.
Use SFDP header version to differentiate between them.
Signed-off-by: Mantas Pucka <mantas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c | 4 ----
drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h | 6 ++++++
drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c
index f6038d3..27838f6 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c
@@ -21,10 +21,6 @@
#define SFDP_4BAIT_ID 0xff84 /* 4-byte Address Instruction Table
*/
#define SFDP_SIGNATURE 0x50444653U
-#define SFDP_JESD216_MAJOR 1
-#define SFDP_JESD216_MINOR 0
-#define SFDP_JESD216A_MINOR 5
-#define SFDP_JESD216B_MINOR 6
struct sfdp_header {
u32 signature; /* Ox50444653U <=> "SFDP" */
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h
index e0a8ded..b84abd0 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h
+++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h
@@ -7,6 +7,12 @@
#ifndef __LINUX_MTD_SFDP_H
#define __LINUX_MTD_SFDP_H
+/* SFDP revisions */
+#define SFDP_JESD216_MAJOR 1
+#define SFDP_JESD216_MINOR 0
+#define SFDP_JESD216A_MINOR 5
+#define SFDP_JESD216B_MINOR 6
+
/* Basic Flash Parameter Table */
/*
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
index 17deaba..50b2478 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
@@ -8,6 +8,32 @@
#include "core.h"
+static int
+w25q256_post_bfpt_fixups(struct spi_nor *nor,
+ const struct sfdp_parameter_header *bfpt_header,
+ const struct sfdp_bfpt *bfpt,
+ struct spi_nor_flash_parameter *params)
+{
+ /*
+ * W25Q256JV supports 4B opcodes but W25Q256FV does not.
+ * Unfortunately, Winbond has re-used the same JEDEC ID for both
+ * variants which prevents us from defining a new entry in the parts
+ * table.
+ * To differentiate between W25Q256JV and W25Q256FV check SFDP
header + * version: only JV has JESD216A compliant structure
(version 5) + */
+
+ if (bfpt_header->major == SFDP_JESD216_MAJOR &&
+ bfpt_header->minor == SFDP_JESD216A_MINOR)
Not sure if this is generic enough. Are you sure that the JV version will
never have an update for the sfdp tables?
+ nor->flags |= SNOR_F_4B_OPCODES;
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static struct spi_nor_fixups w25q256_fixups = {
+ .post_bfpt = w25q256_post_bfpt_fixups,
+};
+
If the post_bfpt hook is called, you already have a valid bfpt table. If the
differentiator between the JV and FV versions is that only the JV defines the
SFDP tables, then your w25q256_post_bfpt_fixups() can look as:
static int w25q256_post_bfpt_fixups()
{
nor->flags |= SNOR_F_4B_OPCODES;
return 0;
}