Re: [PATCH] mtd: rawnand: ingenic: Convert the driver to exec_op()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





Le lun. 18 mai 2020 à 21:35, Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
On Mon, 18 May 2020 21:24:22 +0200
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

 On Mon, 18 May 2020 19:50:04 +0200
 Paul Cercueil <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

 > Hi Boris,
 >
 > Le lun. 18 mai 2020 à 18:56, Boris Brezillon
 > <boris.brezillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
> > Let's convert the driver to exec_op() to have one less driver relying
 > > on the legacy interface.
 >
 > Great work, thanks for that.
 >
 > However it does not work :( nand_scan() returns error -145.

 Looks like the R/B signal is inverted. Can you try with the
 following diff applied?

I checked the DT, and the GPIO is indeed declared GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW,
which explain why the test is inverted. Because of DT ABI stability it
might not be an option to change that, but the signal should actually be
declared GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH.

It depends what you consider what is the active state, is it when "busy" or "ready"? ;)

I can fix it in the devicetree, and the driver would return (gpiod_get_value_cansleep(gpiod) ^ gpiod_is_active_low(gpiod)) for compatibility with the old devicetree.

Cheers,

-Paul


 --->8---
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/ingenic/ingenic_nand_drv.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/ingenic/ingenic_nand_drv.c
 index dcecd54af20b..9206792629a8 100644
 --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/ingenic/ingenic_nand_drv.c
 +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/ingenic/ingenic_nand_drv.c
@@ -249,6 +249,26 @@ static int ingenic_nand_attach_chip(struct nand_chip *chip)
         return 0;
  }

 +static int ingenic_nand_gpio_waitrdy(struct gpio_desc *gpiod,
 +                                    unsigned long timeout_ms)
 +{
 +       /*
+ * Wait until R/B pin indicates chip is ready or timeout occurs. + * +1 below is necessary because if we are now in the last fraction + * of jiffy and msecs_to_jiffies is 1 then we will wait only that
 +        * small jiffy fraction - possibly leading to false timeout.
 +       */
 +       timeout_ms = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(timeout_ms) + 1;
 +       do {
 +               if (!gpiod_get_value_cansleep(gpiod))
 +                       return 0;
 +
 +               cond_resched();
 +       } while (time_before(jiffies, timeout_ms));
 +
 +       return !gpiod_get_value_cansleep(gpiod) ? 0 : -ETIMEDOUT;
 +};
 +
  static int ingenic_nand_exec_instr(struct nand_chip *chip,
                                    struct ingenic_nand_cs *cs,
const struct nand_op_instr *instr) @@ -294,8 +314,8 @@ static int ingenic_nand_exec_instr(struct nand_chip *chip,
                         return nand_soft_waitrdy(chip,
instr->ctx.waitrdy.timeout_ms);

 -               return nand_gpio_waitrdy(chip, nand->busy_gpio,
- instr->ctx.waitrdy.timeout_ms);
 +               return ingenic_nand_gpio_waitrdy(nand->busy_gpio,
+ instr->ctx.waitrdy.timeout_ms);
         default:
                 break;
         }
@@ -322,6 +342,9 @@ static int ingenic_nand_exec_op(struct nand_chip *chip, ret = ingenic_nand_exec_instr(chip, cs, &op->instrs[i]);
                 if (ret)
                         break;
 +
 +               if (op->instrs[i].delay_ns)
 +                       ndelay(op->instrs[i].delay_ns);
         }
         jz4780_nemc_assert(nfc->dev, cs->bank, false);





______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/




[Index of Archives]     [LARTC]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]     [Photo]

  Powered by Linux