On 5/22/2023 7:05 PM, Miquel Raynal wrote:
Hello,
quic_mdalam@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on Thu, 11 May 2023 19:00:13 +0530:
Implement exec_op() so we can later get rid of the legacy interface
implementation.
Co-developed-by: Sricharan Ramabadhran <quic_srichara@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sricharan Ramabadhran <quic_srichara@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Md Sadre Alam <quic_mdalam@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
Change in [v2]
* Missed to post Cover-letter, so posting v2 patch with cover-letter
drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c | 214 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 213 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c
index 72d6168d8a1b..dae460e2aa0b 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c
@@ -157,6 +157,7 @@
#define OP_PAGE_PROGRAM_WITH_ECC 0x7
#define OP_PROGRAM_PAGE_SPARE 0x9
#define OP_BLOCK_ERASE 0xa
+#define OP_CHECK_STATUS 0xc
#define OP_FETCH_ID 0xb
#define OP_RESET_DEVICE 0xd
@@ -235,6 +236,7 @@ nandc_set_reg(chip, reg, \
*/
#define NAND_ERASED_CW_SET BIT(4)
+#define MAX_ADDRESS_CYCLE 5
/*
* This data type corresponds to the BAM transaction which will be used for all
* NAND transfers.
@@ -447,6 +449,29 @@ struct qcom_nand_boot_partition {
u32 page_size;
};
+/*
+ * Qcom op for each exec_op transfer
+ *
+ * @data_instr: data instruction pointer
+ * @data_instr_idx: data instruction index
+ * @rdy_timeout_ms: wait ready timeout in ms
+ * @rdy_delay_ns: Additional delay in ns
+ * @addr1_reg: Address1 register value
+ * @addr2_reg: Address2 register value
+ * @cmd_reg: CMD register value
+ * @flag: flag for misc instruction
+ */
+struct qcom_op {
+ const struct nand_op_instr *data_instr;
+ unsigned int data_instr_idx;
+ unsigned int rdy_timeout_ms;
+ unsigned int rdy_delay_ns;
+ u32 addr1_reg;
+ u32 addr2_reg;
+ u32 cmd_reg;
+ u8 flag;
+};
+
/*
* NAND chip structure
*
@@ -1517,7 +1542,8 @@ static void pre_command(struct qcom_nand_host *host, int command)
clear_read_regs(nandc);
if (command == NAND_CMD_RESET || command == NAND_CMD_READID ||
- command == NAND_CMD_PARAM || command == NAND_CMD_ERASE1)
+ command == NAND_CMD_PARAM || command == NAND_CMD_ERASE1 ||
+ command == NAND_CMD_STATUS)
I don't like this much, is there another way to derive whether
clear_bam_transaction() is needed? What is the rationale behind it?
clear_bam_transcation() is resting all the bam realted counter to 0 before starting new transcation.
I will move these all condition check to exec_ops() specific API , and remove pre_command itself.
Will fix this in next patch V3.
clear_bam_transaction(nandc);
}
@@ -2867,8 +2893,194 @@ static int qcom_nand_attach_chip(struct nand_chip *chip)
return 0;
}
+static int qcom_op_cmd_mapping(struct qcom_nand_controller *nandc, u8 cmd,
+ struct qcom_op *q_op)
+{
+ int ret = 0;
+
+ switch (cmd) {
+ case NAND_CMD_RESET:
+ ret = OP_RESET_DEVICE;
+ break;
+ case NAND_CMD_READID:
+ ret = OP_FETCH_ID;
+ break;
+ case NAND_CMD_PARAM:
+ if (nandc->props->qpic_v2)
+ ret = OP_PAGE_READ_ONFI_READ;
+ else
+ ret = OP_PAGE_READ;
+ break;
+ case NAND_CMD_ERASE1:
+ case NAND_CMD_ERASE2:
+ ret = OP_BLOCK_ERASE;
+ break;
+ case NAND_CMD_STATUS:
+ ret = OP_CHECK_STATUS;
+ break;
+ case NAND_CMD_PAGEPROG:
+ ret = OP_PROGRAM_PAGE;
+ break;
+ default:
This should error out and the error be catch in the check_only path.
Will fix it in next patch V3.
+ break;
+ }
+
+ return ret;
+}
+
+/* NAND framework ->exec_op() hooks and related helpers */
+static void qcom_parse_instructions(struct nand_chip *chip,
+ const struct nand_subop *subop,
+ struct qcom_op *q_op)
+{
+ struct qcom_nand_controller *nandc = get_qcom_nand_controller(chip);
+ const struct nand_op_instr *instr = NULL;
+ unsigned int op_id;
+ int i;
+
+ memset(q_op, 0, sizeof(*q_op));
+
+ for (op_id = 0; op_id < subop->ninstrs; op_id++) {
+ unsigned int offset, naddrs;
+ const u8 *addrs;
+
+ instr = &subop->instrs[op_id];
+
+ switch (instr->type) {
+ case NAND_OP_CMD_INSTR:
+ q_op->cmd_reg = qcom_op_cmd_mapping(nandc, instr->ctx.cmd.opcode, q_op);
+ q_op->rdy_delay_ns = instr->delay_ns;
+ break;
+
+ case NAND_OP_ADDR_INSTR:
+ offset = nand_subop_get_addr_start_off(subop, op_id);
+ naddrs = nand_subop_get_num_addr_cyc(subop, op_id);
+ addrs = &instr->ctx.addr.addrs[offset];
+ for (i = 0; i < min(5U, naddrs); i++) {
Is this min() useful? You already limit the number of cycles to 5,
otherwise the pattern won't match, right?
Yeah you are right. If address cycle is fixed to 5 , then this min not required.
will fix this in next v3 patch.
+ if (i < 4)
+ q_op->addr1_reg |= (u32)addrs[i] << i * 8;
+ else
+ q_op->addr2_reg |= addrs[i];
+ }
+ q_op->rdy_delay_ns = instr->delay_ns;
+ break;
+
+ case NAND_OP_DATA_IN_INSTR:
+ q_op->data_instr = instr;
+ q_op->data_instr_idx = op_id;
+ q_op->rdy_delay_ns = instr->delay_ns;
+ fallthrough;
+ case NAND_OP_DATA_OUT_INSTR:
+ q_op->rdy_delay_ns = instr->delay_ns;
+ break;
+
+ case NAND_OP_WAITRDY_INSTR:
+ q_op->rdy_timeout_ms = instr->ctx.waitrdy.timeout_ms;
+ q_op->rdy_delay_ns = instr->delay_ns;
+ break;
+ }
+ }
+}
+
+static int qcom_read_status_exec(struct nand_chip *chip,
+ const struct nand_subop *subop)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int qcom_erase_cmd_type_exec(struct nand_chip *chip, const struct nand_subop *subop)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int qcom_param_page_type_exec(struct nand_chip *chip, const struct nand_subop *subop)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int qcom_read_id_type_exec(struct nand_chip *chip, const struct nand_subop *subop)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int qcom_misc_cmd_type_exec(struct nand_chip *chip, const struct nand_subop *subop)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int qcom_data_read_type_exec(struct nand_chip *chip, const struct nand_subop *subop)
+{
+ /* currently read_exec_op() return 0 , and all the read operation handle in
+ * actual API itself
+ */
+ return 0;
Please make all exec_op additions in the same patch, unless you're
truly adding a feature, in this case it can be split, but no pattern
should match what's unsupported by ->exec_op(). This way we avoid these
very strange (and wrong) empty functions).
Sure, will take care this in patch V3.
+}
+
+static int qcom_data_write_type_exec(struct nand_chip *chip, const struct nand_subop *subop)
+{
+ /* currently write_exec_op() return 0, and all the write operation handle in
+ * actual API itself
+ */
+ struct qcom_op q_op;
+
+ qcom_parse_instructions(chip, subop, &q_op);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static const struct nand_op_parser qcom_op_parser = NAND_OP_PARSER(
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PATTERN(
+ qcom_misc_cmd_type_exec,
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_CMD_ELEM(false),
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_WAITRDY_ELEM(false)),
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PATTERN(
+ qcom_read_id_type_exec,
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_CMD_ELEM(false),
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_ADDR_ELEM(false, MAX_ADDRESS_CYCLE),
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_DATA_IN_ELEM(false, 8)),
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PATTERN(
+ qcom_param_page_type_exec,
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_CMD_ELEM(false),
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_ADDR_ELEM(false, MAX_ADDRESS_CYCLE),
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_WAITRDY_ELEM(true),
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_DATA_IN_ELEM(false, 512)),
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PATTERN(
+ qcom_read_status_exec,
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_CMD_ELEM(false),
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_DATA_IN_ELEM(false, 1)),
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PATTERN(
+ qcom_erase_cmd_type_exec,
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_CMD_ELEM(false),
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_ADDR_ELEM(false, MAX_ADDRESS_CYCLE),
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_CMD_ELEM(false),
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_WAITRDY_ELEM(false)),
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PATTERN(
+ qcom_data_read_type_exec,
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_CMD_ELEM(false),
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_ADDR_ELEM(false, MAX_ADDRESS_CYCLE),
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_CMD_ELEM(false),
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_WAITRDY_ELEM(true),
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_DATA_IN_ELEM(false, 2048)),
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PATTERN(
+ qcom_data_write_type_exec,
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_CMD_ELEM(true),
+ NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_ADDR_ELEM(true, MAX_ADDRESS_CYCLE)),
+ );
+
+static int qcom_nand_exec_op(struct nand_chip *chip,
+ const struct nand_operation *op,
+ bool check_only)
+{
+ if (check_only)
+ return 0;
This is wrong, you cannot blindly return 0 if check_only is true.
Will fix this in next patch V3.
+ return nand_op_parser_exec_op(chip, &qcom_op_parser,
+ op, check_only);
+}
+
static const struct nand_controller_ops qcom_nandc_ops = {
.attach_chip = qcom_nand_attach_chip,
+ .exec_op = qcom_nand_exec_op,
};
static void qcom_nandc_unalloc(struct qcom_nand_controller *nandc)
Thanks,
Miquèl
