From: Tokunori Ikegami <ikegami.t@gmail.com>
To: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>,
Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@leemhuis.info>,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Joakim.Tjernlund@infinera.com,
miquel.raynal@bootlin.com, vigneshr@ti.com, richard@nod.at,
"regressions@lists.linux.dev" <regressions@lists.linux.dev>
Cc: Chris Packham <chris.packham@alliedtelesis.co.nz>,
Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
marek.vasut@gmail.com, cyrille.pitchen@wedev4u.fr,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [BUG] mtd: cfi_cmdset_0002: write regression since v4.17-rc1
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2022 01:40:33 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <08c76c86-c015-28c3-47b5-18d8e50258e9@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48ad0f65-a12e-e3b0-8c56-3197464c0b59@pengutronix.de>
Hi,
On 2022/03/09 1:23, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
> Hello Tokunori-san,
>
> On 08.03.22 17:13, Tokunori Ikegami wrote:
>> Hi Ahmad-san,
>>
>> On 2022/03/08 18:44, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
>>> Hello Tokunori,
>>>
>>> On 06.03.22 16:49, Tokunori Ikegami wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On 2022/03/04 20:11, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
>>>>> Hello Tokunori-san,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 20.02.22 13:22, Tokunori Ikegami wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Ahmad-san,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Could you please try the version 2 patch attached for the error case?
>>>>>> This version is to check the DQ true data 0xFF by chip_good().
>>>>> I had a similar patch locally as well at first. I just tested yours
>>>>> and I can't reproduce the issue.
>>>> Thanks for your support.
>>>> Sorry if possible could you please retest the attached the patch again since this fixed the version 1 patch maintainer review comments?
>>> Works good.
>>>
>>> Tested-by: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>
>> Thank you so much for your test.
>>>>>> But I am not sure if this works or not since the error is possible to be caused by Hi-Z 0xff on floating bus or etc.
>>>>> That it works for me could be because of Hi-Z 0xff, which is why
>>>>> decided against it.
>>>> I see.
>>>>>>>>>> What seems to work for me is checking if chip_good or chip_ready
>>>>>>>>>> and map_word is equal to 0xFF. I can't justify why this is ok though.
>>>>>>>>>> (Worst case bus is floating at this point of time and Hi-Z is read
>>>>>>>>>> as 0xff on CPU data lines...)
>>>>>>>>> Sorry I am not sure about this.
>>>>>>>>> I thought the chip_ready() itself is correct as implemented as the data sheet in the past.
>>>>>>>>> But it did not work correctly so changed to use chip_good() instead as it is also correct.
>>>>>>>> What exactly in the datasheet makes you believe chip_good is not appropriate?
>>>>>>> I just mentioned about the actual issue behaviors as not worked chip_good() on S29GL964N and not worked chip_ready() on MX29GL512FHT2I-11G before etc.
>>>>>>> Anyway let me recheck the data sheet details as just checked it again quickly but needed more investigation to understand.
>>>>>> As far as I checked still both chip_good() and chip_ready() seem correct but still the root cause is unknown.
>>>>>> If as you mentioned the issue was cased by the DQ true data 0xFF I am not sure why the read work without any error after the write operation.
>>>>>> Also if the error was caused by the Hi-Z 0xff on floating bus as mentioned I am not sure why the read work without any error after the write operation with chip_ready().
>>>>>> Sorry anyway the root cause is also unknown when the write operation was changed to use chip_good() instead of chip_ready().
>>>>> I've be ok with v1 then. Restores working behavior for me and shouldn't break others.
>>>> Noted but still I am thinking the version 2 patch to check 0xff seems better than to use chip_ready() so let me consider this again later.
>>> The original version has less room for surprise as it restores previously
>>> working behavior. Assuming 0xFF to be good without backing from documentation
>>> is more risky IMO.
>> The change to check 0xFF can be limited for the S29GL064N chip do you have any comment about this?
> I see that, but I am not sure it's the correct thing to do on the S29GL064N,
> even if it seems to work. In absence of definitive information from the vendor,
> I'd prefer we just restore behavior as it was before, i.e. using chip_ready
> instead of chip_good for S29GL064N. This is the way of least surprise.
Thanks for your comment. I see okay I will keep the version patch 2
reverting to use chip_ready() for S29GL064N under the review without the
change to check 0xFF.
Regards,
Ikegami
>
>> Just attached the patch changed as so and thinking to send the patch as version 3 to the maintainer if you are okay.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Ikegami
>>
>>> Thanks for your continued support,
>>> Ahmad
>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Ikegami
>>>>
>>>>> Cheers and thanks again,
>>>>> Ahmad
>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Ikegami
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Ikegami
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>> Ahmad
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-08 16:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-12-13 13:24 [BUG] mtd: cfi_cmdset_0002: write regression since v4.17-rc1 Ahmad Fatoum
2021-12-14 7:23 ` Thorsten Leemhuis
2021-12-15 17:34 ` Tokunori Ikegami
2022-01-20 13:00 ` Thorsten Leemhuis
2022-01-28 12:55 ` Ahmad Fatoum
2022-01-29 18:01 ` Tokunori Ikegami
2022-02-07 14:28 ` Ahmad Fatoum
2022-02-13 16:47 ` Tokunori Ikegami
2022-02-14 16:22 ` Ahmad Fatoum
2022-02-14 18:46 ` Tokunori Ikegami
2022-02-20 12:22 ` Tokunori Ikegami
2022-03-04 11:11 ` Ahmad Fatoum
2022-03-06 15:49 ` Tokunori Ikegami
2022-03-08 9:44 ` Ahmad Fatoum
2022-03-08 16:13 ` Tokunori Ikegami
2022-03-08 16:23 ` Ahmad Fatoum
2022-03-08 16:40 ` Tokunori Ikegami [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=08c76c86-c015-28c3-47b5-18d8e50258e9@gmail.com \
--to=ikegami.t@gmail.com \
--cc=Joakim.Tjernlund@infinera.com \
--cc=a.fatoum@pengutronix.de \
--cc=chris.packham@alliedtelesis.co.nz \
--cc=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
--cc=cyrille.pitchen@wedev4u.fr \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=marek.vasut@gmail.com \
--cc=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
--cc=regressions@leemhuis.info \
--cc=regressions@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=vigneshr@ti.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).