[U-Boot] [PATCH v5 17/18] spi: Add SPI NOR protection mechanism

[Jagan Teki]

Fabio,

On 3 November 2015 at 20:29, Fabio Estevam <festevam at gmail.com> wrote:
> Jagan,
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Jagan Teki <jteki at openedev.com> wrote:
>
>>> +       if (flash->is_locked(flash, offset, len) > 0) {
>>> +               printf("offset 0x%x is protected and cannot be written\n", offset);
>>> +               return -EINVAL;
>>> +       }
>>
>> This flash lock check related to non-dm lock ops so it's look not good
>> to me as we assigned lock ops for both dm and non-dm cases.
>
> This is getting totally ridiculous: you have been seeing this patch
> series so many times and now you say this is not OK and you don't give
> me any clue as to what you would like me to change.

Nothing is worse than before or now - as spi-flash code is configured
both the dm and non-dm cases and it's been thinking job as I have
planning for proper design[1] to go ahead. I understand you sent
multiple versions but I already told that "please don't send the next
version" until the current version discussion finishes.

[1] http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot/u-boot-spi.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/next-spi-nor

>
> That's why I proposed earlier that you take the non-SPI patches first
> and then we can rework the SPI flash pieces.
>
>> I will come back for this patch changes what I thought, probably lock
>> ops shouldn't be separate for dm and non-dm as we have different ops
>> based on the flash itself.
>
> I wish we can make progress on this. Not sure how to proceed though.

thanks!
-- 
Jagan | openedev.