[PATCH 2/2] mtd: rawnand: meson: add support for Amlogic NAND flash controller

[boris.brezillon@xxxxxxxxxxx (Boris Brezillon)]

Hi Yixun,

On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 17:38:56 +0800
Yixun Lan <yixun.lan at amlogic.com> wrote:

> >> +
> >> +#define NFC_REG_CMD		0x00
> >> +#define NFC_REG_CFG		0x04
> >> +#define NFC_REG_DADR		0x08
> >> +#define NFC_REG_IADR		0x0c
> >> +#define NFC_REG_BUF		0x10
> >> +#define NFC_REG_INFO		0x14
> >> +#define NFC_REG_DC		0x18
> >> +#define NFC_REG_ADR		0x1c
> >> +#define NFC_REG_DL		0x20
> >> +#define NFC_REG_DH		0x24
> >> +#define NFC_REG_CADR		0x28
> >> +#define NFC_REG_SADR		0x2c
> >> +#define NFC_REG_PINS		0x30
> >> +#define NFC_REG_VER		0x38
> >> +  
> > 
> > Can you put the reg offsets next to their field definitions?
> >   
> actually, we would prefer to put all the CMD definition below the reg
> offset, so it will better reflect what's it belong to.

Just to be clear, I meant something like:

#define NFC_CMD				0x00
#define NFC_CMD_DRD			(0x8 << 14)
#define NFC_CMD_IDLE			(0xc << 14)
...

#define NFC_CFG				0x04
#define NFC_CFG_XXX			xxx
...

I find it easier to guess which register the fields are attached to when
it's defined like that, but I won't block the driver for such a tiny
detail. 

> >> +static void meson_nfc_cmd_ctrl(struct mtd_info *mtd,
> >> +					int cmd, unsigned int ctrl)  
> >   
> > ->cmd_ctrl() has recently been deprecated in favor of ->exec_op(). You  
> > can have a look at the marvell, v610 or fsmc drivers if you want to
> > have an idea of how ->exec_op() should be implemented. Miquel and I are
> > also here to help if you have any questions.
> >   
> 
> follow your suggestion, we have implemented the exec_op() interface,
> we'd really appreciate if you can help to review this ..

Sure, just send a v2 and we'll review it.


> >> +
> >> +static void meson_nfc_cmd_m2n(struct meson_nfc *nfc, int raw)  
> > 
> > n2m -> nand2mem ?
> >   
> yes, it is

Then please use nand2mem, it's clearer.

> >> +static int meson_nfc_wait_dma_finish(struct meson_nfc *nfc)
> >> +{
> >> +	meson_nfc_cmd_idle(nfc, 0);
> >> +	meson_nfc_cmd_idle(nfc, 0);  
> > 
> > Two calls to cmd_idle(), is this expected or a copy&paste error? If
> > that's expected it definitely deserves a comment explaining why?
> >   
> 
> yes, it is intentional
> 
> we will put these comments into the function.
> 	/*
>          * The Nand flash controller is designed as two stages pipleline -
>          *  a) fetch and b) excute.
>          * So, there might be cases when the driver see command queue is
> empty,
>          * but the Nand flash controller still has two commands buffered,
>          * one is fetched into NFC request queue (ready to run), and another
>          * is actively executing.
>          */
> 

So pushing 2 "IDLE" commands guarantees that the pipeline is emptied,
right? The comment looks incomplete, you should explain what those
meson_nfc_cmd_idle() are for.

> >> +static int meson_nfc_ecc_init(struct device *dev, struct mtd_info *mtd)
> >> +{
> >> +	struct nand_chip *nand = mtd_to_nand(mtd);
> >> +	struct meson_nfc_nand_chip *meson_chip = to_meson_nand(nand);
> >> +	struct meson_nfc *nfc = nand_get_controller_data(nand);
> >> +	struct meson_nand_ecc *meson_ecc = nfc->data->ecc;
> >> +	int num = nfc->data->ecc_num;
> >> +	int nsectors, i, bytes;
> >> +
> >> +	/* support only ecc hw mode */
> >> +	if (nand->ecc.mode != NAND_ECC_HW) {  
> > 
> > Given that you support raw accesses, I'm pretty sure you can support
> > ECC_NONE, ECC_SOFT and ECC_ON_DIE with zero effort.
> >   
> 
> is this a block for this driver to be accepted by upstream?

Nope.

> otherwise we'd like to implement this feature later in separate patch.
> 

That's fine.

> >> +	nsectors = mtd->writesize / nand->ecc.size;
> >> +	bytes =(meson_chip->user_mode == NFC_USER2_OOB_BYTES) ? nsectors * 2 : 16;
> >> +	if (mtd->oobsize < (nand->ecc.bytes * nsectors + bytes))
> >> +		return -EINVAL;  
> > 
> > It's probably worth looking at what is being proposed here [2] for the
> > ECC config selection logic.
> >   
> 
> sure, we'd happy to adopt the ECC config helper function, and seems it
> is possible ;-)
> 
> sounds the proposed ECC config patch is still under review, and we
> would like to adjust our code once it's ready (probably we will still
> keep this version in patch v2, then address it in v3 later)

It's been merged, and should be available in the nand/next branch [1].

> >> +static int meson_nfc_buffer_init(struct mtd_info *mtd)
> >> +{
> >> +	struct nand_chip *nand = mtd_to_nand(mtd);
> >> +	struct meson_nfc_nand_chip *meson_chip = to_meson_nand(nand);
> >> +	struct meson_nfc *nfc = nand_get_controller_data(nand);
> >> +	struct device *dev = nfc->dev;
> >> +	int info_bytes, page_bytes;
> >> +	int nsectors;
> >> +
> >> +	nsectors = mtd->writesize / nand->ecc.size;
> >> +	info_bytes = nsectors * PER_INFO_BYTE;
> >> +	page_bytes = mtd->writesize + mtd->oobsize;
> >> +
> >> +	if ((meson_chip->data_buf) && (meson_chip->info_buf))
> >> +		return 0;
> >> +
> >> +	meson_chip->data_buf = devm_kzalloc(dev, page_bytes, GFP_KERNEL);
> >> +	if (!meson_chip->data_buf)
> >> +		return  -ENOMEM;
> >> +
> >> +	meson_chip->info_buf = devm_kzalloc(dev, info_bytes, GFP_KERNEL);
> >> +	if (!meson_chip->info_buf)
> >> +		return  -ENOMEM;  
> > 
> > You're doing DMA on those buffers, and devm_kzalloc() is not
> > DMA-friendly (returned buffers are not aligned on a cache line). Also,
> > you don't have to allocate your own buffers because the core already
> > allocate them (chip->data_buf, chip->oob_poi). All you need to do is
> > set the NAND_USE_BOUNCE_BUFFER flag in chip->options to make sure
> > you're always passed a DMA-able buffer.
> >   
> 
> thanks for the suggestion, we've migrated to use the
> dmam_alloc_coherent() API

kzalloc() should be just fine, no need to alloc a DMA coherent region. 


> 
> >> +	nand->setup_data_interface = meson_nfc_setup_data_interface;
> >> +
> >> +	nand->chip_delay = 200;  
> > 
> > This should not be needed if you implement ->exec_op() and  
> > ->setup_data_interface().  
> >   
> will drop this
> 
> >> +	nand->ecc.mode = NAND_ECC_HW;
> >> +
> >> +	nand->ecc.write_page_raw = meson_nfc_write_page_raw;
> >> +	nand->ecc.write_page = meson_nfc_write_page_hwecc;
> >> +	nand->ecc.write_oob_raw = nand_write_oob_std;
> >> +	nand->ecc.write_oob = nand_write_oob_std;
> >> +
> >> +	nand->ecc.read_page_raw = meson_nfc_read_page_raw;
> >> +	nand->ecc.read_page = meson_nfc_read_page_hwecc;
> >> +	nand->ecc.read_oob_raw = meson_nfc_read_oob_raw;
> >> +	nand->ecc.read_oob = meson_nfc_read_oob;
> >> +
> >> +	mtd = nand_to_mtd(nand);
> >> +	mtd->owner = THIS_MODULE;
> >> +	mtd->dev.parent = dev;
> >> +	mtd->name = devm_kasprintf(nfc->dev, GFP_KERNEL,
> >> +				   "%s:nand", dev_name(dev));
> >> +	if (!mtd->name) {
> >> +		dev_err(nfc->dev, "Failed to allocate mtd->name\n");
> >> +		return -ENOMEM;
> >> +	}  
> > 
> > You set the name after nand_scan_ident() and make it conditional (only
> > if ->name == NULL) so that the label property defined in the DT takes
> > precedence over the default name.  
> 
> we can do this, but as second consideration, we'd prefer simply to drop
> this customization of mtd->name here (we didn't understand your next cs
> id suggestion).

No, you really should set a well-known name, so that people can pass
mtdparts on the kernel command line.

> 
> > Also, I recommend suffixing this name
> > with the CS id, just in case you ever need to support connecting several
> > chips to the same controller. 
> >   
> 
> we actually didn't get the point here, cs is about chip selection with
> multiple nand chip? and how to get this information?

Well, you currently seem to only support one chip per controller, but I
guess the IP can handle several CS lines. So my recommendation is about
choosing a name so that you can later easily add support for multiple
chips without breaking setups where mtdparts is used.

To sum-up, assuming your NAND chip is always connected to CS0 (on the
controller side), I'd suggest doing:

	mtd->name = devm_kasprintf(nfc->dev, GFP_KERNEL,
				   "%s:nand.%d", dev_name(dev), cs_id);

where cs_id is the value you extracted from the reg property of the
NAND node.

Regards,

Boris

[1]http://git.infradead.org/linux-mtd.git/shortlog/refs/heads/nand/next