From: <Tudor.Ambarus@microchip.com>
To: <dac2@pensando.io>, <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>
Cc: michael@walle.cc
Subject: Re: [BUG]: spi-nor: spi_nor_init() fails when SR locked
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 09:37:02 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1ae4f44a-cbd2-b39e-68f7-3d0375c453bf@microchip.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+nMikGSSc5NA80Z89fz4GCh+6Ux2Pr6UyjB5n+qoBkiOqAh=Q@mail.gmail.com>
Hi, David,
On 7/20/20 9:13 PM, David Clear wrote:
>
> Hi Tudor,
>
> I'm seeing a change of behavior in spi-nor/next vs. my older 4.14
> kernel w.r.t. how SR lock is working.
>
> In my system with a Micron mt25qu02g, I'm using the hardware WP# to
> lock the SR. When hardware write-protect is on, at the next reboot
> the kernel rejects the flash as it cannot unlock the whole device.
>
> I traced the problem to spi_nor_write_sr1_and_check(), which is
> writing to the SR and reading back a different value (as the locked SR
> bits are immutable).
>
> Call trace:
> spi_nor_write_sr1_and_check+0x68/0x70
> spi_nor_write_sr_and_check+0x34/0xd0
> spi_nor_sr_unlock+0x108/0x230
> spi_nor_unlock+0x54/0x80 (via spi_nor_unlock_all())
> spi_nor_init+0x94/0x100
>
> spi_nor_write_sr1_and_check() is returning -EIO here:
> if (nor->bouncebuf[0] != sr1) {
> dev_dbg(nor->dev, "SR1: read back test failed\n");
> BUG();
> return -EIO;
> }
>
> In my specific case Linux doesn't have (and cannot be given, for
> product security reasons) control over the WP#. In any case, I don't
> think a write-protected flash should be rejected here.
>
> Can you suggest how we might proceed? The way WP# is used is
> board-specific so perhaps a device-tree property of some sort in the
> flash device node can inform the code to do or not do the
> spi_nor_unlock_all()?
>
> I can take a look at putting a patch together if you suggest an
> acceptable mechanism.
>
Thanks for the detailed report. I'll have to study this a bit, I'll get
back to you in few days/one week. We tackled the unlock_all stuff in
the past, Michael did a patch, I'll check how that fits here.
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linux-mtd/patch/20200327155939.13153-1-michael@walle.cc/
Cheers,
ta
______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-21 9:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-20 18:13 [BUG]: spi-nor: spi_nor_init() fails when SR locked David Clear
2020-07-21 9:37 ` Tudor.Ambarus [this message]
2020-07-21 17:02 ` David Clear
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=1ae4f44a-cbd2-b39e-68f7-3d0375c453bf@microchip.com \
--to=tudor.ambarus@microchip.com \
--cc=dac2@pensando.io \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=michael@walle.cc \
/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).