From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>
To: "Sobon, Przemyslaw" <psobon@amazon.com>
Cc: "keescook@chromium.org" <keescook@chromium.org>,
"joakim.tjernlund@infinera.com" <joakim.tjernlund@infinera.com>,
"ikegami@allied-telesis.co.jp" <ikegami@allied-telesis.co.jp>,
"richard@nod.at" <richard@nod.at>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"marek.vasut@gmail.com" <marek.vasut@gmail.com>,
"linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>,
"computersforpeace@gmail.com" <computersforpeace@gmail.com>,
"dwmw2@infradead.org" <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
Liu Jian <liujian56@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cfi: fix deadloop in cfi_cmdset_0002.c do_write_buffer
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 09:56:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190207095635.0fc3b411@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <acd16b85676e4d1d89f3acfbeda30107@EX13D07UWA001.ant.amazon.com>
Hi Sobon,
On Tue, 5 Feb 2019 22:28:44 +0000
"Sobon, Przemyslaw" <psobon@amazon.com> wrote:
> > From: Boris Brezillon <bbrezillon@kernel.org>
> > Sent: Sunday, February 3, 2019 12:35 AM
> > > +Przemyslaw
> > >
> > > On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 07:30:39 +0800
> > > Liu Jian <liujian56@huawei.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > In function do_write_buffer(), in the for loop, there is a case
> > > > chip_ready() returns 1 while chip_good() returns 0, so it never
> > > > break the loop.
> > > > To fix this, chip_good() is enough and it should timeout if it stay
> > > > bad for a while.
> > >
> > > Looks like Przemyslaw reported and fixed the same problem.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: dfeae1073583(mtd: cfi_cmdset_0002: Change write buffer to
> > > > check correct value)
> > >
> > > Can you put the Fixes tag on a single, and the format is
> > >
> > > Fixes: <hash> ("message")
> > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Yi Huaijie <yihuaijie@huawei.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Liu Jian <liujian56@huawei.com>
> > >
> > > [1]http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1025566/
> > >
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.c | 6 +++---
> > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.c
> > > > b/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.c
> > > > index 72428b6..818e94b 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.c
> > > > @@ -1876,14 +1876,14 @@ static int __xipram do_write_buffer(struct map_info *map, struct flchip *chip,
> > > > continue;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > - if (time_after(jiffies, timeo) && !chip_ready(map, adr))
> > > > - break;
> > > > -
> > > > if (chip_good(map, adr, datum)) {
> > > > xip_enable(map, chip, adr);
> > > > goto op_done;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > + if (time_after(jiffies, timeo))
> > > > + break;
> > > > +
> > > > /* Latency issues. Drop the lock, wait a while and retry */
> > > > UDELAY(map, chip, adr, 1);
> > > > }
> > >
> >
> > BTW, the patch itself looks good to me. Ikegami, can you confirm it does the right thing?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Boris
> >
>
> One comment to this patch. If value is written incorrectly quickly we will be
> stuck in the loop even though nothing is going to change. For example a value was
> written incorrectly after 1us, the loop was set to 1ms, function will return
> after 1ms, this solution is not optimized for performance. I considered same
> when working on this change and decided to do it different way.
Seems like you're right if we assume that checking for GOOD state does
not require a delay after the READY check, but if that's not the case
and an extra delay is actually required, you might end up with a BAD
status while it could have turned GOOD at some point with the 'check
only for GOOD state until we timeout' approach.
TBH, I don't know how CFI flashes work, so I'll let you guys sort this
out.
Regards,
Boris
______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-07 8:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-31 23:30 [PATCH] cfi: fix deadloop in cfi_cmdset_0002.c do_write_buffer Liu Jian
2019-02-03 8:26 ` Boris Brezillon
2019-02-03 8:35 ` Boris Brezillon
2019-02-05 22:28 ` Sobon, Przemyslaw
2019-02-05 23:03 ` ikegami_to
2019-02-07 8:56 ` Boris Brezillon [this message]
2019-02-07 22:59 ` ikegami_to
2019-02-07 23:50 ` Sobon, Przemyslaw
2019-02-08 8:45 ` Joakim Tjernlund
2019-02-08 14:23 ` Tokunori Ikegami
2019-02-14 1:34 ` liujian (CE)
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190207095635.0fc3b411@kernel.org \
--to=boris.brezillon@collabora.com \
--cc=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=ikegami@allied-telesis.co.jp \
--cc=joakim.tjernlund@infinera.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=liujian56@huawei.com \
--cc=marek.vasut@gmail.com \
--cc=psobon@amazon.com \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).