[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 06/16] sf: Update sf to support all sizes of flashes

Simon Glass sjg at chromium.org
Sat Jun 8 16:41:23 CEST 2013


Hi,

On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 1:22 AM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Simon,
>
> On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 4:44 AM, Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
> > Hi Jagan,
> >
> > On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 5:52 AM, Jagannadha Sutradharudu Teki
> > <jagannadha.sutradharudu-teki at xilinx.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Updated the spi_flash framework to handle all sizes of flashes
> >> using bank/extd addr reg facility
> >>
> >> The current implementation in spi_flash supports 3-byte address mode
> >> due to this up to 16Mbytes amount of flash is able to access for those
> >> flashes which has an actual size of > 16MB.
> >>
> >> As most of the flashes introduces a bank/extd address registers
> >> for accessing the flashes in 16Mbytes of banks if the flash size
> >> is > 16Mbytes, this new scheme will add the bank selection feature
> >> for performing write/erase operations on all flashes.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Jagannadha Sutradharudu Teki <jaganna at xilinx.com>
> >
> >
> > I have a few comments on this series, but it mostly looks fine. I think
> the
> > new code is correct.
> >
> > The patches did not apply cleanly for me. Perhaps I am missing
> something. My
> > tree looks like this after I did a bit of merging:
>
> Which patches you had an issues while applying,we have few patches on
> u-boot-spi.git i created these on top of it.
>

I am not sure now - sorry I did not keep a record. But the bundle I used is
here, and it doesn't apply cleanly.

http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/bundle/sjg/jagan/

git am ~/Downloads/bundle-4407-jagan.mbox
Applying: sf: Add bank address register writing support
Applying: sf: Add bank address register reading support
Applying: sf: Add extended addr write support for winbond|stmicro
Applying: sf: Add extended addr read support for winbond|stmicro
Applying: sf: read flash bank addr register at probe time
Applying: sf: Update sf to support all sizes of flashes
error: patch failed: drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash.c:117
error: drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash.c: patch does not apply
Patch failed at 0006 sf: Update sf to support all sizes of flashes
The copy of the patch that failed is found in:
   /home/sjg/u/.git/rebase-apply/patch
When you have resolved this problem, run "git am --resolved".
If you prefer to skip this patch, run "git am --skip" instead.
To restore the original branch and stop patching, run "git am --abort"


>
> >
> > 5864e87 (HEAD, try-spi) cfi_flash: Fix detection of 8-bit bus flash
> devices
> > via address shift
> > f700095 sf: Add Flag status register polling support
> > 42f4b70 sf: Remove spi_flash_cmd_poll_bit()
> > fc31387 sf: Use spi_flash_read_common() in write status poll
> > 923e40e sf: spansion: Add support for S25FL512S_256K
> > c72e52a sf: stmicro: Add support for N25Q1024A
> > 4066f71 sf: stmicro: Add support for N25Q1024
> > 0efaf86 sf: stmicro: Add support for N25Q512A
> > 8fd962f sf: stmicro: Add support for N25Q512
> > f1a2080 sf: Use spi_flash_addr() in write call
> > 31ed498 sf: Update sf read to support all sizes of flashes
> > 0f77642 sf: Update sf to support all sizes of flashes
> > 9e57220 sf: read flash bank addr register at probe time
> > e99a43d sf: Add extended addr read support for winbond|stmicro
> > 2f06d56 sf: Add extended addr write support for winbond|stmicro
> > f02ecf1 sf: Add bank address register reading support
> > 02ba27c sf: Add bank address register writing support
> >
> > Also do you think spi_flash_cmd_bankaddr_write() and related stuff
> should be
> > behind a flag like CONFIG_SPI_BANK_ADDR or similar? How much code space
> does
> > this add?
>
> Initially i thought of the same, but I just updated sf which is
> generic to all sizes of flashes.
> due to this i haven't included the bank read/write on macros, and the
> flash ops will call these
> bank write call irrespective of flash sizes.
>
> As flashes which has below 16Mbytes will have a bank_curr value 0
> so-that even bank write will exit for
> bank 0 operations.
>

Yes this is fine.


>
> +       if (flash->bank_curr == bank_sel) {
> +               debug("SF: not require to enable bank%d\n", bank_sel);
> +               return 0;
> +       }
> +
>
> And due to these framework changes bank+flash ops addition, bin size
> increases appr' ~600bytes
> by enabling stmicro, winbond and spansion flash drivers.(please check
> the size from your end also if required)
>

I suggest you make that function a nop (perhaps using an #ifdef
CONFIG_SPI_BANK_ADDR
inside it or some other name) so that your patches don't increase U-Boot
code size for those boards that don't need support larger devices (which I
guess is almost all of them, right now). U-Boot is quite concerned about
code size.

Tom may chime in and decide it is fine, though.


>
> Please see the commit body on below thread for more info
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/247954/
>
> >
> > In your change to spi_flash_cmd_poll_bit() the effect is not the same I
> > think. It is designed to hold CS active and read the status byte
> > continuously until it changes. But your implementation asserts CS, reads
> the
> > status byte, de-asserts CS, then repeats. Why do we want to change this?
>
> I commented on the actual patch thread, please refer,
>

OK I will take a look.


>
> >
> >
> >
> >> ---
> >> Changes for v2:
> >>         - none
> >>
> >>  drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash.c | 39
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> >>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash.c b/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash.c
> >> index 4576a16..5386884 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash.c
> >> @@ -74,11 +74,9 @@ int spi_flash_cmd_write_multi(struct spi_flash
> *flash,
> >> u32 offset,
> >>         unsigned long page_addr, byte_addr, page_size;
> >>         size_t chunk_len, actual;
> >>         int ret;
> >> -       u8 cmd[4];
> >> +       u8 cmd[4], bank_sel;
> >>
> >>         page_size = flash->page_size;
> >> -       page_addr = offset / page_size;
> >> -       byte_addr = offset % page_size;
> >>
> >>         ret = spi_claim_bus(flash->spi);
> >>         if (ret) {
> >> @@ -88,6 +86,16 @@ int spi_flash_cmd_write_multi(struct spi_flash
> *flash,
> >> u32 offset,
> >>
> >>         cmd[0] = CMD_PAGE_PROGRAM;
> >>         for (actual = 0; actual < len; actual += chunk_len) {
> >> +               bank_sel = offset / SPI_FLASH_16MB_BOUN;
> >> +
> >> +               ret = spi_flash_cmd_bankaddr_write(flash, bank_sel);
> >> +               if (ret) {
> >> +                       debug("SF: fail to set bank%d\n", bank_sel);
> >> +                       return ret;
> >> +               }
> >
> >
> > So we are now doing this for all chips. But isn't it true that only some
> > chips (>16MB?) have a bank address. If so, then I think we should have a
> > flag somewhere to enable this feature
>
> APAMK, currently stmicro, winbond, spansion and macronix have a
> flashes which has > 16Mbytes flashes.
>
> And macronix is also have same bank setup like stmicro, extended addr
> read(RDEAR - 0xC8) and extended addr write(WREAR - 0xC5)
> We need to add this in near future.
>
> I have added Prafulla Wadaskar on this thread (initial contributor for
> macronix.c), may be he will give some more information
> for accessing > 16Mbytes flashes in 3-byte addr mode.
>
> I think we can go ahead for now, may be we will tune sf some more in
> future based on the availability of different flash which crosses
> 16Mbytes
> with different apparoch (other than banking/extended), what do you say?
>

OK, well we don't need a flag since you will never issue the bank address
command unless the chip is larger than 16MB.,


>
> >
> >>
> >> +
> >> +               page_addr = offset / page_size;
> >> +               byte_addr = offset % page_size;
> >
> >
> > This is OK I think. We really don't care about the slower divide so it is
> > not worth optimising for I think.
>
> Yes, I just used the existing spi_flash_addr with offset as an
> argument, anyway sf write have a logic
> to use writing in terms of page sizes and even offset is also varies
> page sizes or requested sizes.
>
> Thanks,
> Jagan.
>


Regards,
Simon


More information about the U-Boot mailing list