On 28/02/2020 06:45, Alexander Sverdlin wrote:
Hi! On 28/02/2020 04:01, chenxiang (M) wrote:JESD216 allows "variable address length" and "variable latency" in Configuration Detection Command Descriptors, in other words "as-is". And they are still unset during Sector Map Parameter Table parsing, which led to "map_id" determined erroneously as 0 for, e.g. S25FS128S.[...]@@ -2570,7 +2687,8 @@ static const struct flash_info spi_nor_ids[] = { { "s25sl12800", INFO(0x012018, 0x0300, 256 * 1024, 64, 0) }, { "s25sl12801", INFO(0x012018, 0x0301, 64 * 1024, 256, 0) }, { "s25fl129p0", INFO(0x012018, 0x4d00, 256 * 1024, 64, SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ | USE_CLSR) }, - { "s25fl129p1", INFO(0x012018, 0x4d01, 64 * 1024, 256, SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ | USE_CLSR) }, + { "s25fl129p1", INFO(0x012018, 0x4d01, 64 * 1024, 256, SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ | USE_CLSR) + .fixups = &s25fs_s_fixups, },It seems SFDP is not supported on s25fl129p (you can check it on https://www.cypress.com/file/400586/download), so is it necessary to add this for this type flash?Yes, all of the above is necessary to repair S25FS128S, which supports SFDP and lands in the above table entry.
So do you know how we can tell if the part is s25fl129p1 or S25FS128S? Is it based on family id? For the part of my board, it has the same id according to "s25fl129p1" entry in the spi-nor driver, yet the SFDP signature is not present (signature reads as 0x4d182001 vs expected 0x50444653). I printed the family id, and it is 81h, which seems to align with S25FS (which should support SFDP). Confused.
What's more, the spi-nor probe is failing for this part since I enabled quad spi. So I am interested to know if there is some differences between these part families for that.
Thanks, John ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/
