From: Mark Tomlinson <Mark.Tomlinson@alliedtelesis.co.nz>
To: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>
Cc: "Joakim.Tjernlund@infinera.com" <Joakim.Tjernlund@infinera.com>,
"ikegami@allied-telesis.co.jp" <ikegami@allied-telesis.co.jp>,
Przemyslaw Sobon <psobon@amazon.com>,
Chris Packham <Chris.Packham@alliedtelesis.co.nz>,
"linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>,
"liujian56@huawei.com" <liujian56@huawei.com>,
"fbettoni@gmail.com" <fbettoni@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: mtd: cfi: Fixed endless loop problem in CFI when value was written but corrupted.
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 20:50:28 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fbb725b9-230a-aadf-9950-d5cf45696cba@alliedtelesis.co.nz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190220090320.01aa2357@collabora.com>
On 20/02/19 9:03 PM, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 20:02:37 +0000
> Mark Tomlinson <Mark.Tomlinson@alliedtelesis.co.nz> wrote:
>
>> On 19/02/19 9:00 PM, Boris Brezillon wrote:
>>> I'm a bit lost. Ikegami told us that checking for chip_ready() was not
>>> enough and chip_good() could return true after a few tests even though
>>> it initially returned false.
>>>
>>> I'd really like to get that fixed, but it looks like you haven't reached
>>> a consensus on what the appropriate fix is :-/.
>> I have done some further testing and this patch doesn't work 100%. It
>> appears at least some flash chips do not start toggling immediately, and
>> therefore chip_ready() can return true early. A timeout is reported,
>> even though that isn't what happened.
>>
>> chip_good() makes an additional check over chip_ready() and is the call
>> I believe we should be using. I will submit a new patch which should fix
>> the infinite loop as well as not mis-reporting errors.
> No, please, don't do that. We already have 3 versions of the same fix
> floating around (one from Ikegami, one from Liu Jian and another one
> from Przemyslaw). Can you please sync and submit a single patch that
> all of you agree on?
>
Ikegami-san has pointed out Liu Jian's patch to me. That patch works fine
for me, so I won't be creating another one afterall. Hope that reduces the
number of possible patches.
______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-20 20:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-07 23:58 [PATCH] mtd: cfi: Fixed endless loop problem in CFI when value was written but corrupted Przemyslaw Sobon
2019-02-08 15:01 ` Tokunori Ikegami
2019-02-14 0:39 ` Chris Packham
2019-02-19 8:00 ` Boris Brezillon
2019-02-19 20:02 ` Mark Tomlinson
2019-02-20 8:03 ` Boris Brezillon
2019-02-20 20:50 ` Mark Tomlinson [this message]
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=fbb725b9-230a-aadf-9950-d5cf45696cba@alliedtelesis.co.nz \
--to=mark.tomlinson@alliedtelesis.co.nz \
--cc=Chris.Packham@alliedtelesis.co.nz \
--cc=Joakim.Tjernlund@infinera.com \
--cc=boris.brezillon@collabora.com \
--cc=fbettoni@gmail.com \
--cc=ikegami@allied-telesis.co.jp \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=liujian56@huawei.com \
--cc=psobon@amazon.com \
/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).