Hi Tudor, ----- On 21 Apr, 2020, at 06:40, Tudor Ambarus Tudor.Ambarus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > On Monday, April 20, 2020 5:50:02 PM EEST Clément Leger wrote: >> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the >> content is safe >> >> Hi Tudor, > > Hi, Clement, > >> >> ----- On 20 Apr, 2020, at 14:14, Tudor Ambarus Tudor.Ambarus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > wrote: >> > Hi, Clement, >> > >> > On Friday, April 17, 2020 7:08:39 PM EEST Clement Leger wrote: >> >> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know >> >> the >> >> content is safe >> >> >> >> Update the issi_parts table for is25lp01g (128MB) device from ISSI. >> >> Tested on Kalray K200 board. >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Clement Leger <cleger@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> --- >> >> >> >> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/issi.c | 2 ++ >> >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >> >> >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/issi.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/issi.c >> >> index ffcb60e54a80..c3c3438e3d08 100644 >> >> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/issi.c >> >> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/issi.c >> >> @@ -49,6 +49,8 @@ static const struct flash_info issi_parts[] = { >> >> >> >> SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | >> >> SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ >> >> | >> >> | SPI_NOR_4B_OPCODES) >> >> | >> >> .fixups = &is25lp256_fixups }, >> >> >> >> + { "is25lp01g", INFO(0x9d601b, 0, 64 * 1024, 2048, >> > >> > There is a "K" flavor of this flash which has 512 Byte Page size with 256 >> > KB Block size. While the page size can be determined by parsing SFDP, I >> > think we will have some problems with sector_size because as of now, the >> > sector_size is always set to 64KB. An incorrect sector_size will affect >> > erases and locking. >> Thanks, I did not noticed that ! If I understand, this will require to >> modify the core to handle sector size the same way as page_size and >> probably add a fixup to detect the "K" options from SFDP ? > > Right. You can add a post_bfpt fixup hook for this flash. You can > differentiate between the "K" version and the rest by the page size. Since the > page size is tightly coupled with the sector size, you can amend both in the > post_bfpt hook. Ok, this seems clear ! I'll give it a try. By looking quickly at the code I think that n_sectors will also have to be updated after discovering the sector_size from BFPT (for flash size computation). Since some parameters of the nor are initialized early in spi_nor_info_init_params using sector_size, should I move the call making use of sector_size later in the init (in spi_nor_late_init_params for instance) ? > >> This is probably more changes than I can handle, and you can probably drop >> this patch since not really functional for "K" type flash. > > I dropped it. You should try to fix it, I can guide you if needed. Or I can do > it myself, but I'll need some help from you at testing. I will try to do it but I will probably only be able to test the patches in a couple of weeks due to our architecture not being rebased on 5.7 yet. Thanks, Clément > > Cheers, > ta ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/