All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
To: mdalam@codeaurora.org
Cc: miquel.raynal@bootlin.com, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, boris.brezillon@collabora.com,
	sricharan@codeaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: rawnand: qcom: update last code word register
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2021 21:15:12 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210105154512.GC14794@thinkpad> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <84dbe5ba193e0da45add2f74d6787bb5@codeaurora.org>

On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 12:24:45AM +0530, mdalam@codeaurora.org wrote:
> On 2020-12-31 16:23, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 07:32:56PM +0530, Md Sadre Alam wrote:
> > > From QPIC version 2.0 onwards new register got added to
> > > read last codeword. This change will update the same.
> > > 
> > > For first three code word READ_LOCATION_n register will be
> > > use.For last code wrod READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_n register will be
> > > use.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Md Sadre Alam <mdalam@codeaurora.org>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c | 79
> > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> > >  1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c
> > > b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c
> > > index 667e4bf..eaef51d 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c
> > > @@ -48,6 +48,10 @@
> > >  #define	NAND_READ_LOCATION_1		0xf24
> > >  #define	NAND_READ_LOCATION_2		0xf28
> > >  #define	NAND_READ_LOCATION_3		0xf2c
> > > +#define NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_0    0xf40
> > > +#define NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_1    0xf44
> > > +#define NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_2    0xf48
> > > +#define NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_3    0xf4c
> > 
> > Please keep the alignment as before.
> > 
>  Fixed alignment in V2 patch
> > > 
> > >  /* dummy register offsets, used by write_reg_dma */
> > >  #define	NAND_DEV_CMD1_RESTORE		0xdead
> > > @@ -187,6 +191,12 @@ nandc_set_reg(nandc,
> > > NAND_READ_LOCATION_##reg,			\
> > >  	      ((size) << READ_LOCATION_SIZE) |			\
> > >  	      ((is_last) << READ_LOCATION_LAST))
> > > 
> > > +#define nandc_set_read_loc_last(nandc, reg, offset, size, is_last)	\
> > > +nandc_set_reg(nandc, NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_##reg,			\
> > > +	      ((offset) << READ_LOCATION_OFFSET) |		\
> > > +	      ((size) << READ_LOCATION_SIZE) |			\
> > > +	      ((is_last) << READ_LOCATION_LAST))
> > > +
> > >  /*
> > >   * Returns the actual register address for all NAND_DEV_ registers
> > >   * (i.e. NAND_DEV_CMD0, NAND_DEV_CMD1, NAND_DEV_CMD2 and
> > > NAND_DEV_CMD_VLD)
> > > @@ -316,6 +326,10 @@ struct nandc_regs {
> > >  	__le32 read_location1;
> > >  	__le32 read_location2;
> > >  	__le32 read_location3;
> > > +	__le32 read_location_last0;
> > > +	__le32 read_location_last1;
> > > +	__le32 read_location_last2;
> > > +	__le32 read_location_last3;
> > > 
> > >  	__le32 erased_cw_detect_cfg_clr;
> > >  	__le32 erased_cw_detect_cfg_set;
> > > @@ -644,6 +658,14 @@ static __le32 *offset_to_nandc_reg(struct
> > > nandc_regs *regs, int offset)
> > >  		return &regs->read_location2;
> > >  	case NAND_READ_LOCATION_3:
> > >  		return &regs->read_location3;
> > > +	case NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_0:
> > > +		return &regs->read_location_last0;
> > > +	case NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_1:
> > > +		return &regs->read_location_last1;
> > > +	case NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_2:
> > > +		return &regs->read_location_last2;
> > > +	case NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_3:
> > > +		return &regs->read_location_last3;
> > >  	default:
> > >  		return NULL;
> > >  	}
> > > @@ -719,9 +741,13 @@ static void update_rw_regs(struct
> > > qcom_nand_host *host, int num_cw, bool read)
> > >  	nandc_set_reg(nandc, NAND_READ_STATUS, host->clrreadstatus);
> > >  	nandc_set_reg(nandc, NAND_EXEC_CMD, 1);
> > > 
> > > -	if (read)
> > > +	if (read) {
> > > +		if (nandc->props->qpic_v2)
> > > +			nandc_set_read_loc_last(nandc, 0, 0, host->use_ecc ?
> > > +					host->cw_data : host->cw_size, 1);
> > 
> > Forgot to add else? Otherwise both NAND_READ_LOCATION_n and
> > NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_n
> > will be used.
> 
>   Here else is not needed , because to read last code word we need to
> configure
>   NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_n register. Any way here we are doing only
> register configuration.
>   for all the code words. Earlier version of QPIC we were using
> nandc_set_read_loc()
>   for all the code words, but in qpic V2 onwards for last code word we have
> to use
>   NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_n register. So configuring here the same.
> 

nandc_set_read_loc() has the last argument "is_last". This is used to convey
whether we need to set READ_LOCATION_LAST bit or not. This is fine for QPIC
IP < 2, but for >=2 we need to use nandc_set_read_loc_last() only. My point
is why do you need to still use nandc_set_read_loc() here for QPIC v2? That's
why I asked you about using else().

> 
> > 
> > >  		nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 0, 0, host->use_ecc ?
> > >  				   host->cw_data : host->cw_size, 1);
> > > +	}
> > >  }
> > > 
> > >  /*
> > > @@ -1096,9 +1122,13 @@ static void config_nand_page_read(struct
> > > qcom_nand_controller *nandc)
> > >  static void
> > >  config_nand_cw_read(struct qcom_nand_controller *nandc, bool use_ecc)
> > >  {
> > > -	if (nandc->props->is_bam)
> > > +	if (nandc->props->is_bam) {
> > > +		if (nandc->props->qpic_v2)
> > > +			write_reg_dma(nandc, NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_0,
> > > +				      4, NAND_BAM_NEXT_SGL);
> > >  		write_reg_dma(nandc, NAND_READ_LOCATION_0, 4,
> > >  			      NAND_BAM_NEXT_SGL);
> > 
> > Don't you need to modify the number of registers to write? It can't be 4
> > all the
> > time if NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_0 is used.
> 
>   Changed number of registers to write from 4 to 1 in V2 patch for register
> NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_0 .
> > 
> > > +	}
> > > 
> > >  	write_reg_dma(nandc, NAND_FLASH_CMD, 1, NAND_BAM_NEXT_SGL);
> > >  	write_reg_dma(nandc, NAND_EXEC_CMD, 1, NAND_BAM_NEXT_SGL);
> > > @@ -1633,16 +1663,28 @@ qcom_nandc_read_cw_raw(struct mtd_info *mtd,
> > > struct nand_chip *chip,
> > >  	}
> > > 
> > >  	if (nandc->props->is_bam) {
> > > -		nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 0, read_loc, data_size1, 0);
> > > +		if (nandc->props->qpic_v2 && cw == (ecc->steps - 1))
> > > +			nandc_set_read_loc_last(nandc, 0, read_loc, data_size1, 0);
> > > +		else
> > > +			nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 0, read_loc, data_size1, 0);
> > 
> > IIUC nandc_set_read_loc_last() is only needed to read the last codeword
> > which is
> > handled by the last command in this function:
> 
>   Function qcom_nandc_read_cw_raw() is getting called for each code word for
> raw read and its reading
>   one code word at a time. So to read last code word when condition cw ==
> (ecc->steps - 1) will match, we have
>   to configure NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_n register. Because below piece of
> code is doing one code word
>   read for first three code word so same logic will also apply for last code
> word as well.
> 

Fine, but still "cw == (ecc->steps - 1)" will stay same for all comparisions
in this function, right? So why can't you use it only for the last command?

> > 
> > nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 3, read_loc, oob_size2, 1);
> > 
> > >  		read_loc += data_size1;
> > > 
> > > -		nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 1, read_loc, oob_size1, 0);
> > > +		if (nandc->props->qpic_v2 && cw == (ecc->steps - 1))
> > > +			nandc_set_read_loc_last(nandc, 1, read_loc, oob_size1, 0);
> > > +		else
> > > +			nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 1, read_loc, oob_size1, 0);
> > >  		read_loc += oob_size1;
> > > 
> > > -		nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 2, read_loc, data_size2, 0);
> > > +		if (nandc->props->qpic_v2 && cw == (ecc->steps - 1))
> > > +			nandc_set_read_loc_last(nandc, 2, read_loc, data_size2, 0);
> > > +		else
> > > +			nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 2, read_loc, data_size2, 0);
> > >  		read_loc += data_size2;
> > > 
> > > -		nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 3, read_loc, oob_size2, 1);
> > > +		if (nandc->props->qpic_v2 && cw == (ecc->steps - 1))
> > > +			nandc_set_read_loc_last(nandc, 3, read_loc, oob_size2, 0);
> > > +		else
> > > +			nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 3, read_loc, oob_size2, 1);
> > >  	}
> > > 
> > >  	config_nand_cw_read(nandc, false);
> > > @@ -1873,14 +1915,27 @@ static int read_page_ecc(struct
> > > qcom_nand_host *host, u8 *data_buf,
> > > 
> > >  		if (nandc->props->is_bam) {
> > >  			if (data_buf && oob_buf) {
> > > -				nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 0, 0, data_size, 0);
> > > -				nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 1, data_size,
> > > -						   oob_size, 1);
> > > +				if (nandc->props->qpic_v2 && i == (ecc->steps - 1)) {
> > > +					nandc_set_read_loc_last(nandc, 0, 0, data_size, 0);
> > 
> > Why do you need this? Can't you use nandc_set_read_loc()? Same for below
> > cases.
> 
>   Here we are looping for all the code words and when we will do
> configuration for last
>   code word we have to use NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_n register that's why
> i am using
>   nandc_set_read_loc_last() instead of nandc_set_read_loc().
> > 

Sorry, confused! You are calling nandc_set_read_loc_last() twice and only the
last one has "is_last" flag set. Can you please clarify?

Thanks,
Mani

> > Thanks,
> > Mani
> > 
> > > +					nandc_set_read_loc_last(nandc, 1, data_size,
> > > +								oob_size, 1);
> > > +				} else {
> > > +					nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 0, 0, data_size, 0);
> > > +					nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 1, data_size,
> > > +							   oob_size, 1);
> > > +				}
> > >  			} else if (data_buf) {
> > > -				nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 0, 0, data_size, 1);
> > > +				if (nandc->props->qpic_v2 && i == (ecc->steps - 1))
> > > +					nandc_set_read_loc_last(nandc, 0, 0, data_size, 1);
> > > +				else
> > > +					nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 0, 0, data_size, 1);
> > >  			} else {
> > > -				nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 0, data_size,
> > > -						   oob_size, 1);
> > > +				if (nandc->props->qpic_v2 && i == (ecc->steps - 1))
> > > +					nandc_set_read_loc_last(nandc, 0, data_size,
> > > +								oob_size, 1);
> > > +				else
> > > +					nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 0, data_size,
> > > +							   oob_size, 1);
> > >  			}
> > >  		}
> > > 
> > > --
> > > 2.7.4
> > > 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
To: mdalam@codeaurora.org
Cc: sricharan@codeaurora.org, boris.brezillon@collabora.com,
	linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	miquel.raynal@bootlin.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: rawnand: qcom: update last code word register
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2021 21:15:12 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210105154512.GC14794@thinkpad> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <84dbe5ba193e0da45add2f74d6787bb5@codeaurora.org>

On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 12:24:45AM +0530, mdalam@codeaurora.org wrote:
> On 2020-12-31 16:23, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 07:32:56PM +0530, Md Sadre Alam wrote:
> > > From QPIC version 2.0 onwards new register got added to
> > > read last codeword. This change will update the same.
> > > 
> > > For first three code word READ_LOCATION_n register will be
> > > use.For last code wrod READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_n register will be
> > > use.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Md Sadre Alam <mdalam@codeaurora.org>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c | 79
> > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> > >  1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c
> > > b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c
> > > index 667e4bf..eaef51d 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c
> > > @@ -48,6 +48,10 @@
> > >  #define	NAND_READ_LOCATION_1		0xf24
> > >  #define	NAND_READ_LOCATION_2		0xf28
> > >  #define	NAND_READ_LOCATION_3		0xf2c
> > > +#define NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_0    0xf40
> > > +#define NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_1    0xf44
> > > +#define NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_2    0xf48
> > > +#define NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_3    0xf4c
> > 
> > Please keep the alignment as before.
> > 
>  Fixed alignment in V2 patch
> > > 
> > >  /* dummy register offsets, used by write_reg_dma */
> > >  #define	NAND_DEV_CMD1_RESTORE		0xdead
> > > @@ -187,6 +191,12 @@ nandc_set_reg(nandc,
> > > NAND_READ_LOCATION_##reg,			\
> > >  	      ((size) << READ_LOCATION_SIZE) |			\
> > >  	      ((is_last) << READ_LOCATION_LAST))
> > > 
> > > +#define nandc_set_read_loc_last(nandc, reg, offset, size, is_last)	\
> > > +nandc_set_reg(nandc, NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_##reg,			\
> > > +	      ((offset) << READ_LOCATION_OFFSET) |		\
> > > +	      ((size) << READ_LOCATION_SIZE) |			\
> > > +	      ((is_last) << READ_LOCATION_LAST))
> > > +
> > >  /*
> > >   * Returns the actual register address for all NAND_DEV_ registers
> > >   * (i.e. NAND_DEV_CMD0, NAND_DEV_CMD1, NAND_DEV_CMD2 and
> > > NAND_DEV_CMD_VLD)
> > > @@ -316,6 +326,10 @@ struct nandc_regs {
> > >  	__le32 read_location1;
> > >  	__le32 read_location2;
> > >  	__le32 read_location3;
> > > +	__le32 read_location_last0;
> > > +	__le32 read_location_last1;
> > > +	__le32 read_location_last2;
> > > +	__le32 read_location_last3;
> > > 
> > >  	__le32 erased_cw_detect_cfg_clr;
> > >  	__le32 erased_cw_detect_cfg_set;
> > > @@ -644,6 +658,14 @@ static __le32 *offset_to_nandc_reg(struct
> > > nandc_regs *regs, int offset)
> > >  		return &regs->read_location2;
> > >  	case NAND_READ_LOCATION_3:
> > >  		return &regs->read_location3;
> > > +	case NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_0:
> > > +		return &regs->read_location_last0;
> > > +	case NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_1:
> > > +		return &regs->read_location_last1;
> > > +	case NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_2:
> > > +		return &regs->read_location_last2;
> > > +	case NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_3:
> > > +		return &regs->read_location_last3;
> > >  	default:
> > >  		return NULL;
> > >  	}
> > > @@ -719,9 +741,13 @@ static void update_rw_regs(struct
> > > qcom_nand_host *host, int num_cw, bool read)
> > >  	nandc_set_reg(nandc, NAND_READ_STATUS, host->clrreadstatus);
> > >  	nandc_set_reg(nandc, NAND_EXEC_CMD, 1);
> > > 
> > > -	if (read)
> > > +	if (read) {
> > > +		if (nandc->props->qpic_v2)
> > > +			nandc_set_read_loc_last(nandc, 0, 0, host->use_ecc ?
> > > +					host->cw_data : host->cw_size, 1);
> > 
> > Forgot to add else? Otherwise both NAND_READ_LOCATION_n and
> > NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_n
> > will be used.
> 
>   Here else is not needed , because to read last code word we need to
> configure
>   NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_n register. Any way here we are doing only
> register configuration.
>   for all the code words. Earlier version of QPIC we were using
> nandc_set_read_loc()
>   for all the code words, but in qpic V2 onwards for last code word we have
> to use
>   NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_n register. So configuring here the same.
> 

nandc_set_read_loc() has the last argument "is_last". This is used to convey
whether we need to set READ_LOCATION_LAST bit or not. This is fine for QPIC
IP < 2, but for >=2 we need to use nandc_set_read_loc_last() only. My point
is why do you need to still use nandc_set_read_loc() here for QPIC v2? That's
why I asked you about using else().

> 
> > 
> > >  		nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 0, 0, host->use_ecc ?
> > >  				   host->cw_data : host->cw_size, 1);
> > > +	}
> > >  }
> > > 
> > >  /*
> > > @@ -1096,9 +1122,13 @@ static void config_nand_page_read(struct
> > > qcom_nand_controller *nandc)
> > >  static void
> > >  config_nand_cw_read(struct qcom_nand_controller *nandc, bool use_ecc)
> > >  {
> > > -	if (nandc->props->is_bam)
> > > +	if (nandc->props->is_bam) {
> > > +		if (nandc->props->qpic_v2)
> > > +			write_reg_dma(nandc, NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_0,
> > > +				      4, NAND_BAM_NEXT_SGL);
> > >  		write_reg_dma(nandc, NAND_READ_LOCATION_0, 4,
> > >  			      NAND_BAM_NEXT_SGL);
> > 
> > Don't you need to modify the number of registers to write? It can't be 4
> > all the
> > time if NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_0 is used.
> 
>   Changed number of registers to write from 4 to 1 in V2 patch for register
> NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_0 .
> > 
> > > +	}
> > > 
> > >  	write_reg_dma(nandc, NAND_FLASH_CMD, 1, NAND_BAM_NEXT_SGL);
> > >  	write_reg_dma(nandc, NAND_EXEC_CMD, 1, NAND_BAM_NEXT_SGL);
> > > @@ -1633,16 +1663,28 @@ qcom_nandc_read_cw_raw(struct mtd_info *mtd,
> > > struct nand_chip *chip,
> > >  	}
> > > 
> > >  	if (nandc->props->is_bam) {
> > > -		nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 0, read_loc, data_size1, 0);
> > > +		if (nandc->props->qpic_v2 && cw == (ecc->steps - 1))
> > > +			nandc_set_read_loc_last(nandc, 0, read_loc, data_size1, 0);
> > > +		else
> > > +			nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 0, read_loc, data_size1, 0);
> > 
> > IIUC nandc_set_read_loc_last() is only needed to read the last codeword
> > which is
> > handled by the last command in this function:
> 
>   Function qcom_nandc_read_cw_raw() is getting called for each code word for
> raw read and its reading
>   one code word at a time. So to read last code word when condition cw ==
> (ecc->steps - 1) will match, we have
>   to configure NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_n register. Because below piece of
> code is doing one code word
>   read for first three code word so same logic will also apply for last code
> word as well.
> 

Fine, but still "cw == (ecc->steps - 1)" will stay same for all comparisions
in this function, right? So why can't you use it only for the last command?

> > 
> > nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 3, read_loc, oob_size2, 1);
> > 
> > >  		read_loc += data_size1;
> > > 
> > > -		nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 1, read_loc, oob_size1, 0);
> > > +		if (nandc->props->qpic_v2 && cw == (ecc->steps - 1))
> > > +			nandc_set_read_loc_last(nandc, 1, read_loc, oob_size1, 0);
> > > +		else
> > > +			nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 1, read_loc, oob_size1, 0);
> > >  		read_loc += oob_size1;
> > > 
> > > -		nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 2, read_loc, data_size2, 0);
> > > +		if (nandc->props->qpic_v2 && cw == (ecc->steps - 1))
> > > +			nandc_set_read_loc_last(nandc, 2, read_loc, data_size2, 0);
> > > +		else
> > > +			nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 2, read_loc, data_size2, 0);
> > >  		read_loc += data_size2;
> > > 
> > > -		nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 3, read_loc, oob_size2, 1);
> > > +		if (nandc->props->qpic_v2 && cw == (ecc->steps - 1))
> > > +			nandc_set_read_loc_last(nandc, 3, read_loc, oob_size2, 0);
> > > +		else
> > > +			nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 3, read_loc, oob_size2, 1);
> > >  	}
> > > 
> > >  	config_nand_cw_read(nandc, false);
> > > @@ -1873,14 +1915,27 @@ static int read_page_ecc(struct
> > > qcom_nand_host *host, u8 *data_buf,
> > > 
> > >  		if (nandc->props->is_bam) {
> > >  			if (data_buf && oob_buf) {
> > > -				nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 0, 0, data_size, 0);
> > > -				nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 1, data_size,
> > > -						   oob_size, 1);
> > > +				if (nandc->props->qpic_v2 && i == (ecc->steps - 1)) {
> > > +					nandc_set_read_loc_last(nandc, 0, 0, data_size, 0);
> > 
> > Why do you need this? Can't you use nandc_set_read_loc()? Same for below
> > cases.
> 
>   Here we are looping for all the code words and when we will do
> configuration for last
>   code word we have to use NAND_READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_n register that's why
> i am using
>   nandc_set_read_loc_last() instead of nandc_set_read_loc().
> > 

Sorry, confused! You are calling nandc_set_read_loc_last() twice and only the
last one has "is_last" flag set. Can you please clarify?

Thanks,
Mani

> > Thanks,
> > Mani
> > 
> > > +					nandc_set_read_loc_last(nandc, 1, data_size,
> > > +								oob_size, 1);
> > > +				} else {
> > > +					nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 0, 0, data_size, 0);
> > > +					nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 1, data_size,
> > > +							   oob_size, 1);
> > > +				}
> > >  			} else if (data_buf) {
> > > -				nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 0, 0, data_size, 1);
> > > +				if (nandc->props->qpic_v2 && i == (ecc->steps - 1))
> > > +					nandc_set_read_loc_last(nandc, 0, 0, data_size, 1);
> > > +				else
> > > +					nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 0, 0, data_size, 1);
> > >  			} else {
> > > -				nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 0, data_size,
> > > -						   oob_size, 1);
> > > +				if (nandc->props->qpic_v2 && i == (ecc->steps - 1))
> > > +					nandc_set_read_loc_last(nandc, 0, data_size,
> > > +								oob_size, 1);
> > > +				else
> > > +					nandc_set_read_loc(nandc, 0, data_size,
> > > +							   oob_size, 1);
> > >  			}
> > >  		}
> > > 
> > > --
> > > 2.7.4
> > > 

______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/

  reply	other threads:[~2021-01-05 15:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-12-17 14:02 [PATCH] mtd: rawnand: qcom: update last code word register Md Sadre Alam
2020-12-17 14:02 ` Md Sadre Alam
2020-12-31 10:53 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2020-12-31 10:53   ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2021-01-04 18:54   ` mdalam
2021-01-04 18:54     ` mdalam
2021-01-05 15:45     ` Manivannan Sadhasivam [this message]
2021-01-05 15:45       ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2021-01-10  3:49       ` mdalam
2021-01-10  3:49         ` mdalam
2021-02-14 21:17 Md Sadre Alam
2021-02-14 21:17 ` Md Sadre Alam
2021-02-15  8:40 ` Miquel Raynal
2021-02-15  8:40   ` Miquel Raynal
2021-02-15 19:19   ` mdalam
2021-02-15 19:19     ` mdalam
2021-02-15 19:16 Md Sadre Alam
2021-02-15 19:16 ` Md Sadre Alam
2021-02-16  8:16 ` Miquel Raynal
2021-02-16  8:16   ` Miquel Raynal
2021-02-16 17:53   ` mdalam
2021-02-16 17:53     ` mdalam
2021-02-18  9:20     ` Miquel Raynal
2021-02-18  9:20       ` Miquel Raynal
2021-02-18 16:29       ` mdalam
2021-02-18 16:29         ` mdalam
2021-02-21 20:27         ` mdalam
2021-02-21 20:27           ` mdalam
2021-02-22 20:04 Md Sadre Alam
2021-02-22 20:04 ` Md Sadre Alam
2021-02-23 16:34 ` Miquel Raynal
2021-02-23 16:34   ` Miquel Raynal
2021-02-23 19:43   ` mdalam
2021-02-23 19:43     ` mdalam
2021-02-24  4:39     ` mdalam
2021-02-24  4:39       ` mdalam
2021-02-24  6:48       ` Miquel Raynal
2021-02-24  6:48         ` Miquel Raynal
2021-02-24 16:30         ` mdalam
2021-02-24 16:30           ` mdalam
2021-02-24 16:36           ` Miquel Raynal
2021-02-24 16:36             ` Miquel Raynal
2021-02-26 18:25             ` mdalam
2021-02-26 18:25               ` mdalam

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=20210105154512.GC14794@thinkpad \
    --to=manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org \
    --cc=boris.brezillon@collabora.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=mdalam@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
    --cc=sricharan@codeaurora.org \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.