> From: Boris Brezillon <bbrezillon@xxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Sunday, February 3, 2019 12:35 AM > > +Przemyslaw > > > > On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 07:30:39 +0800 > > Liu Jian <liujian56@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > In function do_write_buffer(), in the for loop, there is a case > > > chip_ready() returns 1 while chip_good() returns 0, so it never > > > break the loop. > > > To fix this, chip_good() is enough and it should timeout if it stay > > > bad for a while. > > > > Looks like Przemyslaw reported and fixed the same problem. > > > > > > > > Fixes: dfeae1073583(mtd: cfi_cmdset_0002: Change write buffer to > > > check correct value) > > > > Can you put the Fixes tag on a single, and the format is > > > > Fixes: <hash> ("message") > > > > > Signed-off-by: Yi Huaijie <yihuaijie@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Liu Jian <liujian56@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > [1]http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1025566/ > > > > > --- > > > drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.c | 6 +++--- > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.c > > > b/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.c > > > index 72428b6..818e94b 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.c > > > +++ b/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.c > > > @@ -1876,14 +1876,14 @@ static int __xipram do_write_buffer(struct map_info *map, struct flchip *chip, > > > continue; > > > } > > > > > > - if (time_after(jiffies, timeo) && !chip_ready(map, adr)) > > > - break; > > > - > > > if (chip_good(map, adr, datum)) { > > > xip_enable(map, chip, adr); > > > goto op_done; > > > } > > > > > > + if (time_after(jiffies, timeo)) > > > + break; > > > + > > > /* Latency issues. Drop the lock, wait a while and retry */ > > > UDELAY(map, chip, adr, 1); > > > } > > > > BTW, the patch itself looks good to me. Ikegami, can you confirm it does the right thing? > > Thanks, > > Boris > One comment to this patch. If value is written incorrectly quickly we will be stuck in the loop even though nothing is going to change. For example a value was written incorrectly after 1us, the loop was set to 1ms, function will return after 1ms, this solution is not optimized for performance. I considered same when working on this change and decided to do it different way. Regards, Przemek ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/