[U-Boot] [PATCH] sf: ids: Correct Micron n25q128 flags

[U-Boot] [PATCH] sf: ids: Correct Micron n25q128 flags

[Phil Edworthy]

The n25q128 devices support 4K erase.

Signed-off-by: Phil Edworthy <phil.edworthy@renesas.com>
---
 drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c b/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c
index edca94e..e31131e 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c
@@ -123,8 +123,8 @@ const struct spi_flash_info spi_flash_ids[] = {
 	{"n25q32a",	   INFO(0x20bb16, 0x0,  64 * 1024,    64, RD_FULL | WR_QPP | SECT_4K) },
 	{"n25q64",	   INFO(0x20ba17, 0x0,  64 * 1024,   128, RD_FULL | WR_QPP | SECT_4K) },
 	{"n25q64a",	   INFO(0x20bb17, 0x0,  64 * 1024,   128, RD_FULL | WR_QPP | SECT_4K) },
-	{"n25q128",	   INFO(0x20ba18, 0x0,  64 * 1024,   256, RD_FULL | WR_QPP) },
-	{"n25q128a",	   INFO(0x20bb18, 0x0,  64 * 1024,   256, RD_FULL | WR_QPP) },
+	{"n25q128",	   INFO(0x20ba18, 0x0,  64 * 1024,   256, RD_FULL | WR_QPP | SECT_4K) },
+	{"n25q128a",	   INFO(0x20bb18, 0x0,  64 * 1024,   256, RD_FULL | WR_QPP | SECT_4K) },
 	{"n25q256",	   INFO(0x20ba19, 0x0,  64 * 1024,   512, RD_FULL | WR_QPP | SECT_4K) },
 	{"n25q256a",	   INFO(0x20bb19, 0x0,  64 * 1024,   512, RD_FULL | WR_QPP | SECT_4K) },
 	{"n25q512",	   INFO(0x20ba20, 0x0,  64 * 1024,  1024, RD_FULL | WR_QPP | E_FSR | SECT_4K) },
-- 
2.7.4

[U-Boot] [PATCH] sf: ids: Correct Micron n25q128 flags

[Jagan Teki]

On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Phil Edworthy
<phil.edworthy@renesas.com> wrote:
> The n25q128 devices support 4K erase.

It's OK, but go with 64K erase.

thanks!
-- 
Jagan Teki
Free Software Engineer | www.openedev.com
U-Boot, Linux | Upstream Maintainer
Hyderabad, India.

[U-Boot] [PATCH] sf: ids: Correct Micron n25q128 flags

[Phil Edworthy]

Hi Jagan,

On 21 December 2016 11:10, Jagan Teki wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Phil Edworthy
> <phil.edworthy@renesas.com> wrote:
> > The n25q128 devices support 4K erase.
> 
> It's OK, but go with 64K erase.
Sorry, I don?t understand your comment.
Do you mean we should stick with 64K erase?
If so, then what about all the other Micron devices that have SECT_4K?

Thanks
Phil

[U-Boot] [PATCH] sf: ids: Correct Micron n25q128 flags

[Jagan Teki]

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:15 PM, Phil Edworthy
<phil.edworthy@renesas.com> wrote:
> Hi Jagan,
>
> On 21 December 2016 11:10, Jagan Teki wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Phil Edworthy
>> <phil.edworthy@renesas.com> wrote:
>> > The n25q128 devices support 4K erase.
>>
>> It's OK, but go with 64K erase.
> Sorry, I don?t understand your comment.
> Do you mean we should stick with 64K erase?
> If so, then what about all the other Micron devices that have SECT_4K?

It's because we have tested 64K on these parts and it's fine why can't
we move 4K because 64K look faster, did you find any issue with 64K on
this specific part?

thanks!
-- 
Jagan Teki
Free Software Engineer | www.openedev.com
U-Boot, Linux | Upstream Maintainer
Hyderabad, India.

[U-Boot] [PATCH] sf: ids: Correct Micron n25q128 flags

[Phil Edworthy]

Hi Jagan,

On 21 December 2016 11:21, Jagan Teki wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:15 PM, Phil Edworthy
> <phil.edworthy@renesas.com> wrote:
> > On 21 December 2016 11:10, Jagan Teki wrote:
> >> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Phil Edworthy
> >> <phil.edworthy@renesas.com> wrote:
> >> > The n25q128 devices support 4K erase.
> >>
> >> It's OK, but go with 64K erase.
> > Sorry, I don?t understand your comment.
> > Do you mean we should stick with 64K erase?
> > If so, then what about all the other Micron devices that have SECT_4K?
> 
> It's because we have tested 64K on these parts and it's fine why can't
> we move 4K because 64K look faster, did you find any issue with 64K on
> this specific part?
No, I didn?t find any problems with it at 64K erase.
As you say, erasing 64K is much faster than 16 x 4K erase. So should we
move the other Micron parts to 64K?

Thanks
Phil