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

[Tom Rini]

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!

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20150303/ce9d6c44/attachment.sig>