On Tue, 28 Apr 2020 14:14:31 +0800 masonccyang@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > Hi Pratyush, > > > > On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 14:39:42 +0800 > > > Mason Yang <masonccyang@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > This is repost of patchset from Boris Brezillon's > > > > [RFC,00/18] mtd: spi-nor: Proposal for 8-8-8 mode support [1]. > > > > > > I only quickly went through the patches you sent and saying it's a > > > repost of the RFC is a bit of a lie. You completely ignored the state > > > tracking I was trying to do to avoid leaving the flash in 8D mode when > > > suspending/resetting the board, and I think that part is crucial. If I > > > remember correctly, we already had this discussion so I must say I'm a > > > bit disappointed. > > > > > > Can you sync with Pratyush? I think his series [1] is better in that > it > > > tries to restore the flash in single-SPI mode before suspend (it's > > > missing the shutdown case, but that can be easily added I think). Of > > > course that'd be even better to have proper state tracking at the SPI > > > NOR level. > > > > Hi Mason, > > > > I posted a re-roll of my series here [0]. Could you please base your > > changes on top of it? Let me know if the series is missing something you > > > need. > > > > [0] > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mtd/20200424184410.8578-1-p.yadav@xxxxxx/ > > > Our mx25uw51245g supports BFPT DWORD-18,19 and 20 data and xSPI profile > 1.0, > and it comply with BFPT DWORD-19, octal mode enable sequences by write CFG > Reg2 > with instruction 0x72. Therefore, I can't apply your patches. > > I quickly went through your patches but can't reply them in each your > patches. Why?!! Aren't you registered to the MTD mailing list? Sorry but having reviews outside of the original thread is far from ideal. Please find a way to reply to the original patchset. > > i.e,. > 1) [v4,03/16] spi: spi-mem: allow specifying a command's extension > > - u8 opcode; > + u16 opcode; > > big/little Endian issue, right? There's no endianness issue since it's SPI controller responsibility to interpret this field. > why not just u8 ext_opcode; Because I see the ext_ext_code comimg, and it's also more consistent with the addr field if we use an u16 and a number of cmd cycles. > No any impact for exist code and actually only xSPI device use extension > command. And extending the opcode field to an u16 has no impact either. ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/