On Mon, Jul 23 2018, Brian Norris wrote: > Hi Boris, > > On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 1:10 PM, Boris Brezillon > <boris.brezillon at bootlin.com> wrote: >> On Mon, 23 Jul 2018 11:13:50 -0700 >> Brian Norris <computersforpeace at gmail.com> wrote: >>> I noticed this got merged, but I wanted to put my 2 cents in here: >> >> I wish you had replied to this thread when it was posted (more than >> 6 months ago). Reverting the patch now implies making some people >> unhappy because they'll have to resort to their old out-of-tree >> hacks :-(. > > I'd say I'm sorry for not following things closely these days, but I'm > not really that sorry. There are plenty of other capable hands. And if > y'all shoot yourselves in the foot, so be it. This patch isn't going > to blow things up, but now that I did finally notice it (because it > happened to show up in a list of backports I was looking at), I > thought better late than never to remind you. > > For way of notification: Marek already noticed that we've started down > a slippery slope months ago: > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/4/8/141 > Re: [PATCH] mtd: spi-nor: clear Extended Address Reg on switch to > 3-byte addressing. > > I'm not quite sure why that wasn't taken to its logical conclusion -- > that the hack should be reverted. > > This problem has been noted many times already, and we've always > stayed on the side of *avoiding* this hack. A few references from a > search of my email: > > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2013-March/046343.html > [PATCH 1/3] mtd: m25p80: utilize dedicated 4-byte addressing commands > > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/barebox/2014-September/020682.html > [RFC] MTD m25p80 3-byte addressing and boot problem > > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2015-February/057683.html > [PATCH 2/2] m25p80: if supported put chip to deep power down if not used > >>> On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 10:53:42AM +0800, Zhiqiang Hou wrote: >>> > From: Hou Zhiqiang <Zhiqiang.Hou at nxp.com> >>> > >>> > Restore the status to be compatible with legacy devices. >>> > Take Freescale eSPI boot for example, it copies (in 3 Byte >>> > addressing mode) the RCW and bootloader images from SPI flash >>> > without firing a reset signal previously, so the reboot command >>> > will fail without reseting the addressing mode of SPI flash. >>> > This patch implement .shutdown function to restore the status >>> > in reboot process, and add the same operation to the .remove >>> > function. >>> >>> We have previously rejected this patch multiple times, because the above >>> comment demonstrates a broken product. >> >> If we were to only support working HW parts, I fear Linux would not >> support a lot of HW (that's even more true when it comes to flashes :P). > > You stopped allowing UBI to attach to MLC NAND recently, no? That > sounds like almost the same boat -- you've probably killed quite a few > shitty products, if they were to use mainline directly. > > Anyway, that's derailing the issue. Supporting broken hardware isn't > something you try to do by applying the same hack to all systems. You > normally try to apply your hack as narrowly as possible. You seem to > imply that below. So maybe that's a solution to move forward with. But > I'd personally be just as happy to see the patch reverted. > >>> You cannot guarantee that all >>> reboots will invoke the .shutdown() method -- what about crashes? What >>> about watchdog resets? IIUC, those will hit the same broken behavior, >>> and have unexepcted behavior in your bootloader. >> >> Yes, there are corner cases that are not addressed with this approach, > > Is a system crash really a corner case? :D > >> but it still seems to improve things. Of course, that means the >> user should try to re-route all HW reset sources to SW ones (RESET input >> pin muxed to the GPIO controller, watchdog generating an interrupt >> instead of directly asserting the RESET output pin), which is not always >> possible, but even when it's not, isn't it better to have a setup that >> works fine 99% of the time instead of 50% of the time? > > Perhaps, but not at the expense of future development. And > realistically, no one is doing that if they have this hack. Most > people won't even know that this hack is protecting them at all (so > again, they won't try to mitigate the problem any further). > >>> I suppose one could argue for doing this in remove(), but AIUI you're >>> just papering over system bugs by introducing the shutdown() function >>> here. Thus, I'd prefer we drop the shutdown() method to avoid misleading >>> other users of this driver. >> >> I understand your point. But if the problem is about making sure people >> designing new boards get that right, why not complaining at probe time >> when things are wrong? >> >> I mean, spi_nor_restore() seems to only do something on very specific >> NORs (those on which a SW RESET does not resets the addressing >> mode). > > The point isn't that SW RESET doesn't reset the addressing mode -- it > does on any flash I've seen. The point is that most systems are built > around a stateless assumption in these flash. IIRC, there wasn't even > a SW RESET command at all until these "huge" flash came around and > stateful addressing modes came about. So boot ROMs and bootloaders > would have to be updated to start figuring out when/how to do this SW > RESET. And once two vendors start doing it differently (I'm not sure: > have they done this already? I think so) it's no longer something a > boot ROM will get right. > > The only way to get this stuff right is to have a hardware reset, or > else to avoid all of the stateful modes in software. > >> So, how about adding a flag that says "my board has the NOR HW >> RESET pin wired" (there would be a DT props to set that flag). Then you >> add a WARN_ON() when this flag is not set and a NOR chip impacted by >> this bug is detected. > > I'd kinda prefer the reverse. There really isn't a need to document > anything for a working system (software usually can't control this > RESET pin). The burden should be on the b0rked system to document > where it needs unsound hacks to survive. > >> This way you make sure people are informed that >> they're doing something wrong, and for those who can't change their HW >> (because it's already widely deployed), you have a fix that improve >> things. > > Or even better: put this hack behind a DT flag, so that one has to > admit that their board design is broken before it will even do > anything. Proposal: "linux,badly-designed-flash-reset". > > But, I'd prefer just (partially?) reverting this, and let the authors > submit something that works. We're not obligated to keep bad hacks in > the kernel. > > Brian One possibility that occurred to me when I was exploring this issue is to revert to 3-byte mode whenever 4-byte was not actively in use. So any access beyond 16Meg is: switch-to-4-byte ; perform IO ; switch to 3-byte or similar. On my hardware it would be more efficient to use the 4-byte opcode to perform the IO, then reset the cached 4th address byte that the NOR chip transparently remembered. This adds a little overhead, but should be fairly robust. It doesn't help if something goes terribly wrong while IO is happening, but I don't think any other software solution does either. How would you see that approach? Thanks, NeilBrown -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 832 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/attachments/20180724/819d2906/attachment.sig>