[U-Boot] [PATCH v6 21/21] sf: Fix s25fs512s id param table

[Siva Durga Prasad Paladugu]

Hi,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jagan Teki [mailto:jagan at openedev.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 6:15 PM
> To: Siva Durga Prasad Paladugu <sivadur at xilinx.com>
> Cc: u-boot at lists.denx.de; Vignesh R <vigneshr at ti.com>
> Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v6 21/21] sf: Fix s25fs512s id param table
> 
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 12:32 PM, Siva Durga Prasad Paladugu
> <siva.durga.paladugu at xilinx.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: U-Boot [mailto:u-boot-bounces at lists.denx.de] On Behalf Of Jagan
> >> Teki
> >> Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 9:33 AM
> >> To: u-boot at lists.denx.de
> >> Cc: Jagan Teki <jagan at openedev.com>
> >> Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v6 21/21] sf: Fix s25fs512s id param table
> >>
> >> s25fs512s and s25fl512s_256k have common id information till 5 bytes
> >> and 6th byte have different family id like FS and FL-S as 0x81 and 0x80.
> >>
> >> Reported-by: Vignesh R <vigneshr at ti.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jagan at openedev.com>
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c | 2 +-
> >>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c
> >> b/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c index 4ec2255..8f9520f 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash_ids.c
> >> @@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ const struct spi_flash_info spi_flash_ids[] = {
> >>       {"s25fl256s_256k", INFO(0x010219, 0x4d00, 256 * 1024,   128,
> >> RD_FULL | WR_QPP) },
> >>       {"s25fl256s_64k",  INFO(0x010219, 0x4d01,  64 * 1024,   512, RD_FULL
> >> | WR_QPP) },
> >>       {"s25fs256s_64k",  INFO6(0x010219, 0x4d0181, 64 * 1024, 512,
> >> RD_FULL | WR_QPP | SECT_4K) },
> >> -     {"s25fs512s",      INFO(0x010220, 0x4d00, 128 * 1024,   512, RD_FULL |
> >> WR_QPP) },
> >> +     {"s25fs512s",      INFO6(0x010220, 0x4d0081, 128 * 1024,   512,
> >> RD_FULL | WR_QPP) },
> >
> > As I said in my earlier comments, Please add SECT_4K, otherwise it will be
> broken.
> 
> If SECT_4K need then it should be an existing issue, but Vignesh R tested this
> already. Vignesh any comment?
No, previously, you are disabling 4K sector erase using spansion_s25fss_disable_4KB_erase() routine and
making the device as uniform sector size and hence I think no issues previously without 4k erase commands.
But now, as you removed it(spansion_s25fss_disable_4KB_erase() ) in 10/21, normal sector erase command may not work on top/bottom sectors with 4k sector size
and it may fail now.

Thanks,
Siva
> 
> thanks!
> --
> Jagan Teki
> Free Software Engineer | www.openedev.com U-Boot, Linux | Upstream
> Maintainer Hyderabad, India.