[PATCH 1/6] Revert "spi: zynq_qspi: Add parallel memories support in QSPI driver"

[Abbarapu, Venkatesh]

Hi,
Tested with the non-stacked default single configuration on ZynqMP zcu102 board and didn’t see any issue.

ZynqMP> sf probe 0 0 0
SF: Detected mt25qu512a with page size 256 Bytes, erase size 64 KiB, total 64 MiB
ZynqMP> sf erase 0x0 0x4000000;mw.b 0x8000 aabbccdd 0x4000000;sf write 0x8000 0x0 0x4000000;mw.b 0x8008000 0x0 0x4000000;sf read 0x8008000 0x0 0x4000000;cmp.b 0x8000 0x8008000 0x4000000
SF: 67108864 bytes @ 0x0 Erased: OK
device 0 whole chip
SF: 67108864 bytes @ 0x0 Written: OK
device 0 whole chip
SF: 67108864 bytes @ 0x0 Read: OK
Total of 67108864 byte(s) were the same

Thanks
Venkatesh

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut at mailbox.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2024 2:12 PM
> To: Abbarapu, Venkatesh <venkatesh.abbarapu at amd.com>; Marek Vasut
> <marek.vasut+renesas at mailbox.org>; u-boot at lists.denx.de
> Cc: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara at arm.com>; Ashok Reddy Soma
> <ashok.reddy.soma at amd.com>; Jagan Teki <jagan at amarulasolutions.com>;
> Michael Walle <mwalle at kernel.org>; Simek, Michal <michal.simek at amd.com>;
> Patrice Chotard <patrice.chotard at foss.st.com>; Patrick Delaunay
> <patrick.delaunay at foss.st.com>; Pratyush Yadav <p.yadav at ti.com>; Quentin
> Schulz <quentin.schulz at cherry.de>; Sean Anderson <seanga2 at gmail.com>;
> Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>; Takahiro Kuwano
> <Takahiro.Kuwano at infineon.com>; Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com>; Tudor
> Ambarus <tudor.ambarus at linaro.org>; uboot-stm32 at st-md-
> mailman.stormreply.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] Revert "spi: zynq_qspi: Add parallel memories support in
> QSPI driver"
> 
> On 10/23/24 5:18 AM, Abbarapu, Venkatesh wrote:
> > Hi Marek,
> > There was some issue and fix is sent
> > https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/20241018082644.22495-1-venkatesh.abbara
> > pu at amd.com/T/#u
> 
> Is this one fix or three fixes for three different issues ?
> 
> This seems to fix READ errors, which is apparently another error introduced by this
> stuff. In my case, plain and simply 'sf probe ; sf update' combination with single non-
> stacked SPI NOR does not work. Was such a simple configuration ever tested ?
> 
> > Not sure we need to revert whole parallel/stacked support?
> Please stop top-posting.