Re: [BUG] mtd: cfi_cmdset_0002: write regression since v4.17-rc1

From: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>
To: Tokunori Ikegami <ikegami.t@gmail.com>,
	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>
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>
Subject: Re: [BUG] mtd: cfi_cmdset_0002: write regression since v4.17-rc1
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2022 12:11:32 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f9e46b61-37e5-a280-edb0-27f8e81a8680@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <117facba-ba33-349d-1085-25315cc1ae92@gmail.com>

Hello Tokunori-san,

On 20.02.22 13:22, Tokunori Ikegami wrote:
> Hi Ahmad-san,
> 
> Could you please try the version 2 patch attached for the error case?
> This version is to check the DQ true data 0xFF by chip_good().

I had a similar patch locally as well at first. I just tested yours
and I can't reproduce the issue.

> But I am not sure if this works or not since the error is possible to be caused by Hi-Z 0xff on floating bus or etc.

That it works for me could be because of Hi-Z 0xff, which is why
decided against it.

>>>>> 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.
> 
> As far as I checked still both chip_good() and chip_ready() seem correct but still the root cause is unknown.
> If as you mentioned the issue was cased by the DQ true data 0xFF I am not sure why the read work without any error after the write operation.
> Also if the error was caused by the Hi-Z 0xff on floating bus as mentioned I am not sure why the read work without any error after the write operation with chip_ready().
> Sorry anyway the root cause is also unknown when the write operation was changed to use chip_good() instead of chip_ready().

I've be ok with v1 then. Restores working behavior for me and shouldn't break others.

Cheers and thanks again,
Ahmad

> 
> Regards,
> Ikegami
> 
>>
>> Regards,
>> Ikegami
>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Ahmad
>>>
>>>

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Steuerwalder Str. 21                       | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany                  | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |