From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
	aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org
Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ACE4EC433F5
	for <linuxppc-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Mon, 14 Feb 2022 18:47:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1])
	by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4JyCrC3y0Gz3cWq
	for <linuxppc-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 05:47:07 +1100 (AEDT)
Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org;
	dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=RJZZX4DX;
	dkim-atps=neutral
Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized)
 smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com (client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::102d;
 helo=mail-pj1-x102d.google.com; envelope-from=ikegami.t@gmail.com;
 receiver=<UNKNOWN>)
Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key;
 unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256
 header.s=20210112 header.b=RJZZX4DX; dkim-atps=neutral
Received: from mail-pj1-x102d.google.com (mail-pj1-x102d.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102d])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4JyCqS5lPSz3bSk
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 05:46:27 +1100 (AEDT)
Received: by mail-pj1-x102d.google.com with SMTP id
 n19-20020a17090ade9300b001b9892a7bf9so7332122pjv.5
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Mon, 14 Feb 2022 10:46:27 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112;
 h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language:to
 :cc:references:from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=DgckHGaAkZcrGYa6I90wSGex+wSps1HIk1YzJ1huHBo=;
 b=RJZZX4DXXXc2Vva5RTK54qqa2xE6JBudRSuqI1jH8ljthTNxhlQbRoXtDtgKJ/Vtd3
 9ARstZWodppgVy/ebyhHmFuYiBxh2UAqBhQ/E2HUbJnV47uO0Je2ybKWozhvnHoZFa/n
 PJQElJg2hTvwZbmARt5NeCK94ASxd9CeE+VG/w+N1dmHyu0dDtOclUaqiUiNGpkFSUQg
 FZd/gMLsHHcB5kTYNCETi/yTUZV4pWlqn5DSfzTBdjoGNc8fIJcLvalCCW8W3xbvIE7v
 wuorMvmulrHFt/gA587y5lKfUCWoYEIdYQ5T7VeAAMwZtcUqBjcMest87frN83K7Je1T
 nMHg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
 h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject
 :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to
 :content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=DgckHGaAkZcrGYa6I90wSGex+wSps1HIk1YzJ1huHBo=;
 b=U0dqjEeG2BdeDkFEQql7VjpMcsg44VVJjPYgfCCHE1oES8dM9+iXZahooBj+/P2npX
 AN9UFcjLC9yhdRoljd2hInFs8Qsy6FyOwzjPZV+G9jvLOBdL2hz3oJ6FEBem4XZlhIUu
 89q43XiOEEiBgrtJBFLj71ORiQJ93RP6X/YB2BdOatfXxEVRcDi2YZQaAKWegrhfJ81T
 R+4JG/cwvoMLKj5okA8R4zAgZ/0oeAJdQ9Zs93yqAcd4p9EaTwme0nfU5N0z6uKSQhkB
 +GlwBv4KAvuVpIwnr0/adycPO1hob8dg3wG1v3XxUKJXfuRExwN1Uuv5mvopbQD7DY7T
 xfmg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531tb53qmjLmlyI4O0h5wpSHHHoYTYWM7kigDadWcgOI6gDFHByt
 0Bn9aH8lZGeyy+g+4UsEt/4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwJMB9C8naMZb2fI5M9G0VerPo7wYHQv0HzQTYEZm+nvYJla2KU96FqYyucOl71Ghs2t/6Q6g==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:4f87:: with SMTP id qe7mr40474pjb.77.1644864385890; 
 Mon, 14 Feb 2022 10:46:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.122.100] (133-175-21-116.tokyo.ap.gmo-isp.jp.
 [133.175.21.116])
 by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v2sm14583655pjt.55.2022.02.14.10.46.20
 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128);
 Mon, 14 Feb 2022 10:46:25 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <cedb1604-e024-2738-5b33-15703a653803@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2022 03:46:18 +0900
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.6.0
Subject: Re: [BUG] mtd: cfi_cmdset_0002: write regression since v4.17-rc1
Content-Language: en-US
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>
References: <b687c259-6413-26c9-d4c9-b3afa69ea124@pengutronix.de>
 <dff2abcc-5813-2f2c-35ba-f03cd1f35ac3@leemhuis.info>
 <e11b76dc-5539-fb7e-da1c-a5005713d6b0@gmail.com>
 <3dbbcee5-81fc-cdf5-9f8b-b6ccb95beddc@pengutronix.de>
 <0f2cfcac-83ca-51a9-f92c-ff6495dca1d7@gmail.com>
 <b231b498-c8d2-28af-ce66-db8c168047f7@pengutronix.de>
 <66ee55d9-4f20-6722-6097-e53c2108ea07@gmail.com>
 <579eab10-594c-d6b2-0ddb-ea6ab8e02856@pengutronix.de>
From: Tokunori Ikegami <ikegami.t@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <579eab10-594c-d6b2-0ddb-ea6ab8e02856@pengutronix.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
 "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
 marek.vasut@gmail.com, Chris Packham <chris.packham@alliedtelesis.co.nz>,
 Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@pengutronix.de>, cyrille.pitchen@wedev4u.fr,
 Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>,
 David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org
Sender: "Linuxppc-dev"
 <linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org>

Hi Ahmad-san,

On 2022/02/15 1:22, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
> Hello Tokunori-san,
>
> On 13.02.22 17:47, Tokunori Ikegami wrote:
>> Hi Ahmad-san,
>>
>> Thanks for your confirmations. Sorry for late to reply.
> No worries. I appreciate you taking the time.
>
>> Could you please try the patch attached to disable the chip_good() change as before?
>> I think this should work for S29GL964N since the chip_ready() is used and works as mentioned.
> yes, this resolves my issue:
> Tested-by: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>
Thanks for your testing. I have just sent the patch to review.
>
>>>>> Doesn't seem to be a buffered write issue here though as the writes
>>>>> did work fine before dfeae1073583. Any other ideas?
>>>> At first I thought the issue is possible to be resolved by using the word write instead of the buffered writes.
>>>> Now I am thinking to disable the changes dfeae1073583 partially with any condition if possible.
>>> 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.

Regards,
Ikegami

>
> Cheers,
> Ahmad
>
>