From: Jungseung Lee <js07.lee@samsung.com>
To: Jungseung Lee <js07.lee@gmail.com>,
Tudor.Ambarus@microchip.com, js07.lee@samsung.com
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, vigneshr@ti.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] mtd: spi-nor: add 4bit block protection support
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 20:42:00 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0a2c4e9132f7d4f61fd3ce87c5393c65515b937e.camel@samsung.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPP0e=NMzizy=fEZi4nWzo9GAJOpB2Qwv7ReK7HDvrGKUv+VEw@mail.gmail.com>
Hi, Tudor,
2020-01-18 (Sat), 00:06 +0900, Jungseung Lee:
> Hi, Tudor,
>
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 7:49 PM <Tudor.Ambarus@microchip.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi, Jungseung,
> >
> > Thanks for working on this.
> >
> > On Monday, January 13, 2020 7:59:06 AM EET Jungseung Lee wrote:
> > > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you
> > > know the
> > > content is safe
> > >
> > > Currently, we are supporting block protection only for
> > > flash chips with 3 block protection bits in the SR register.
> > > This patch enables block protection support for some flash with
> > > 4 block protection bits(bp0-3).
> >
> > Some? Isn't this generic for all the flashes that support BP0-3?
> >
>
> This one would be a generic solution to support BP0-3 on Status
> Register.
> From my study, this covers all the flashes listed on spi-nor.c that
> have BP0-3 bit on SR.
> It looks like I have to change this description.
>
> Note that it is NOT for some flashes that have BP0-3 in another
> register.
> As you know, just like SPI_NOR_HAS_TB did.
>
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jungseung Lee <js07.lee@samsung.com>
> > > ---
> > > v3 :
> > > Fix wrong ofs calculation on v2 patch
> > > v2 :
> > > Add sample table portion about 4bit block protection on the
> > > comment
> > > Trivial coding style change
> > >
> > > drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c | 127
> > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> > > include/linux/mtd/spi-nor.h | 8 +++
> > > 2 files changed, 119 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-
> > > nor/spi-nor.c
> > > index e3da6a8654a8..7e8af6c4fdfa 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
> > > @@ -238,6 +238,14 @@ struct flash_info {
> > > * status register. Must
> > > be used
> > > with * SPI_NOR_HAS_TB.
> > > */
> > > +#define SPI_NOR_HAS_BP3 BIT(17) /*
> > > + * Flash SR has 4 bit
> > > fields (BP0-3)
> > > + * for block protection.
> > > + */
> > > +#define SPI_NOR_BP3_SR_BIT6 BIT(18) /*
> > > + * BP3 is bit 6 of status
> > > register.
> > > + * Must be used with
> >
> > Are we safe to replace SPI_NOR_TB_SR_BIT6 and SPI_NOR_BP3_SR_BIT6
> > with a
> > SPI_NOR_SR_TB_BIT6_BP3_BIT5? Or maybe with a
> > SPI_NOR_SR_BP3_BIT6_TB_BIT5, how
> > is more convenient?
> >
>
> Let's think about some flash in which BP0-3 exists in the status
> register but TB exists in another register.
> for example, mx25u12835f.
> I haven't tested yet, but according to the datasheet, I think this
> patch can support 4bit block protection for the flash.
>
> In order to embrace the case, how about letting them as It is.
> Is there any suggestion?
>
Hmm.. I again have summarized the case of using 4bit block protection.
* Not supporting TB on status register.
- BP3(BIT5)
SPI_NOR_HAS_BP3
- BP3(BIT6)
SPI_NOR_HAS_BP3 | SPI_NOR_BP3_SR_BIT6
* Supporting TB on status register.
- TB(BIT6), BP3(BIT5)
SPI_NOR_HAS_TB | SPI_NOR_TB_SR_BIT6 | SPI_NOR_HAS_BP3
vs
SPI_NOR_HAS_TB | SPI_NOR_HAS_BP3 | SPI_NOR_SR_TB_BIT6_BP3_BIT5
- TB(BIT5), BP3(BIT6)
SPI_NOR_HAS_TB | SPI_NOR_HAS_BP3 | SPI_NOR_BP3_SR_BIT6
vs
SPI_NOR_HAS_TB | SPI_NOR_HAS_BP3 | SPI_NOR_SR_TB_BIT5_BP3_BIT6
SPI_NOR_BP3_SR_BIT6 and SPI_NOR_TB_SR_BIT6 must exist becuase it maybe
used. It would be ok to add some definitions(as you mentioned) to get
same value with SPI_NOR_BP3_SR_BIT6 or SPI_NOR_TB_SR_BIT6 for
readabilty.
But I think there is nothing looks so cool. Any suggestion?
> > Cheers,
> > ta
> >
>
>
Thanks,
Jungseung Lee
______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-22 11:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CGME20200113055910epcas1p4f97dfeb465b00d66649d6321cffc7b5a@epcas1p4.samsung.com>
2020-01-13 5:59 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] mtd: spi-nor: introduce SR_BP_SHIFT define Jungseung Lee
[not found] ` <CGME20200113055910epcas1p377b2618bea2ca860acac2b6f34e2b83e@epcas1p3.samsung.com>
2020-01-13 5:59 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] mtd: spi-nor: add 4bit block protection support Jungseung Lee
2020-01-14 10:49 ` Tudor.Ambarus
2020-01-17 15:06 ` Jungseung Lee
2020-01-22 11:42 ` Jungseung Lee [this message]
2020-01-22 14:31 ` Tudor.Ambarus
2020-01-22 17:14 ` Michael Walle
2020-01-23 3:59 ` Jungseung Lee
2020-01-23 8:15 ` Michael Walle
2020-02-11 7:52 ` chenxiang (M)
2020-03-04 5:20 ` Jungseung Lee
2020-03-04 8:36 ` chenxiang (M)
2020-03-07 7:40 ` Jungseung Lee
2020-01-22 19:36 ` Michael Walle
2020-01-23 6:22 ` Jungseung Lee
2020-01-23 8:10 ` Michael Walle
2020-01-23 8:53 ` Jungseung Lee
2020-01-23 9:31 ` Michael Walle
2020-01-28 11:01 ` Jungseung Lee
2020-01-28 12:29 ` [SPAM] " Michael Walle
2020-01-30 8:17 ` Jungseung Lee
2020-01-30 8:36 ` [SPAM] " Michael Walle
2020-01-30 10:07 ` Jungseung Lee
2020-02-03 13:56 ` Vignesh Raghavendra
2020-02-03 14:38 ` [SPAM] " Michael Walle
2020-02-03 14:58 ` Jungseung Lee
2020-02-03 17:31 ` Vignesh Raghavendra
2020-02-07 12:17 ` Tudor.Ambarus
2020-02-10 8:33 ` Michael Walle
2020-02-10 9:47 ` Tudor.Ambarus
2020-02-10 9:59 ` Tudor.Ambarus
2020-02-10 10:40 ` Michael Walle
2020-02-10 11:27 ` Tudor.Ambarus
2020-02-10 12:14 ` Michael Walle
2020-02-10 15:50 ` Tudor.Ambarus
2020-02-10 10:29 ` Michael Walle
2020-02-10 11:26 ` Tudor.Ambarus
2020-02-19 10:50 ` Jungseung Lee
2020-02-19 11:08 ` Michael Walle
2020-02-19 11:23 ` Jungseung Lee
2020-02-19 11:36 ` Michael Walle
2020-02-20 19:09 ` Michael Walle
2020-02-21 9:30 ` Tudor.Ambarus
2020-02-25 8:20 ` Tudor.Ambarus
2020-02-25 9:25 ` Jungseung Lee
[not found] ` <CGME20200113055910epcas1p384c04182e7c643163d659d42fafd01b3@epcas1p3.samsung.com>
2020-01-13 5:59 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] mtd: spi-nor: support lock/unlock for a few Micron chips Jungseung Lee
2020-01-13 12:30 ` John Garry
2020-01-13 12:40 ` Jungseung Lee
2020-01-13 12:45 ` Jungseung Lee
2020-01-13 13:00 ` John Garry
2020-02-17 0:18 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] mtd: spi-nor: introduce SR_BP_SHIFT define Tudor.Ambarus
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=0a2c4e9132f7d4f61fd3ce87c5393c65515b937e.camel@samsung.com \
--to=js07.lee@samsung.com \
--cc=Tudor.Ambarus@microchip.com \
--cc=js07.lee@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--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).