[U-Boot] [PATCH v3 0/9] sf: Update flash params for supported read commands and sector size

Wed Apr 15 03:06:44 CEST 2015

Hi Jagan,

On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 6 March 2015 at 06:30, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Jagan,
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 1:43 AM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 4 March 2015 at 09:02, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi Tom,
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 6:52 AM, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 04:31:44PM +0800, Bin Meng wrote:
>>>>>> +Tom
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Jagan,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 9:50 PM, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> > Hi Jagan,
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >> Hi Jagan,
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >>> On 12 January 2015 at 09:12, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >>>> Hi Jagan,
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>> On 17 December 2014 at 13:32, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Jagan,
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 15 December 2014 at 19:21, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Jagan,
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 3:40 PM, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi Jagan,
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Bin,
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 11 December 2014 at 08:34, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Jagan,
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 2:41 AM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Bin,
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 10 December 2014 at 18:21, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> This series update SPI flash supported read commands per datasheet
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> in the flash params table, and change flash sector size to 4KiB as
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> long as flash supports sector erase (20h) command, to ensure
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 'sf erase offset +len' work on 4KiB boundary instead of 64KiB when
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> given SECT_4K.
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Changes in v3:
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Rebase with Jagan's patch series @ http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/419154/
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Bin Meng (9):
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>   sf: Update SST flash params
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>   sf: Update Atmel flash params
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>   sf: Update EON flash params
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>   sf: Update GigaDevice flash params
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>   sf: Update Macronix flash params
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>   sf: Update Spansion flash params
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>   sf: Update Micron flash params
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>   sf: Update Winbond flash params
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>   sf: Give proper spacing between flash table params
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the updates - have you verified these changes?
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I verified some, but not all of these flash parts. The update is based
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> on flash datasheet, so if something is broken, eg before this series
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> the flash advertises only READ_NORM and after my series it is changed
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> to READ_FULL, and let's say QUAD_IO_FAST is not working, it is very
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> likely that the SPI controller driver has some bugs when supporting
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> QUAD_IO_FAST.
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Since these updates were tested before, I will skip these for this PR.
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Will test all the rest (except these) and send the PR soon.
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Let me know your inputs?
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I am fine, as long as this PR will not contains other commits which
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> modify the same sf_params.c to introduce more flash support. We can
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> test these updates and if everything looks fine, apply these first and
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ask other commits to rebase on this series to introduce more flash
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> support.
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Do you have any additional comments about this patch series besides
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> the S25FL128S_64K and S25FL256S_64K sector size? If not, I can send
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> the v4.
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm thinking about the other flashes too,  since these params were taken from
>>>>>> >>>>>>> previous working and Linux mtd.
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> You mean 'thinking about' or 'testing'? I should say previously they
>>>>>> >>>>>> might not be 100% working as per datasheet some flash params currently
>>>>>> >>>>>> are apparently wrong.
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> Yes - about testing.
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> Ping? What about your test results about this patch series?
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> Some were pending - Will comment, pls- wait.
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> thanks!
>>>>>> >>> --
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> I still don't see any additional comments. Looking at the history this
>>>>>> >> patch series has been sitting there for months. Would you please let
>>>>>> >> me know what you think about this series?
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Could you respond this? I wonder if this series could be merged in
>>>>>> > before MW is closed.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I feel that you did not work on this. Can you please respond with any comments?
>>>>>
>>>>> Indeed.  This looks like a fairly trivial sync-up, can you shoot me all
>>>>> of the patchwork links and I'll take a look?  Thanks!
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for checking. Here you are:
>>>>
>>>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/419633/
>>>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/419634/
>>>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/419635/
>>>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/419636/
>>>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/419637/
>>>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/419638/
>>>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/419639/
>>>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/419640/
>>>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/419641/
>>>>
>>>> They might not be applied cleanly now due to the significant delay
>>>> since it was originally posted to the mailing list. So far Jagan
>>>> pointed out only one issue and he said he would continue looking into
>>>> the patches but I did not receive any feedback for months.
>>>
>>> Sorry that I'm in long vacations which is less possible in mailing.
>>> As these changes are very crucial, I keep waiting the same.
>>
>> What are you waiting for? Do you mean you have some sort of testing
>> out there in the background and you don't have complete test result
>> yet?
>
> I mean I did some testing, and moved my wedding vacations(currently IN)
> I will look at it after 25 March, if still you feel these are urgent.
>
> Please test it all possible flashes (atleast once) then may be Tom/Simon will
> look those (if possible I will comment on testings).
>
> I do have some flashes on my hand to verify but currently I'm busy
> with my vacations,
> once I switch back to work may be will look at and finalize the same.
>
>>
>>> I will be back on March, end - if still need an urgent sync-up on these changes
>>> Tom or Simon please look at the same.
>>>
>>
>> OK, so this series will for sure miss the v2015.04 release (it already
>> missed the v2015.01 release before)
>

I see you are back. Any further comments before I rebase and give another spin?

Regards,
Bin