Am 26.11.2012 06:31, schrieb walimis:
On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 11:03:13PM +0100, Stefan Weil wrote:
There are several ARM and MIPS boards which are manufactured with
either Intel (pflash_cfi01.c) or AMD (pflash_cfi02.c) flash memory.
The Linux kernel supports both and first probes for AMD flash which
resulted in one or two warnings from the Intel flash emulation:
pflash_write: Unimplemented flash cmd sequence (offset 0000000000000000, wcycle
0x0 cmd 0x0 value 0xf000f0)
pflash_write: Unimplemented flash cmd sequence (offset 0000000000000000, wcycle
0x0 cmd 0x0 value 0xf0)
Hi Stefan,
I ever submited a similar patch to mailing list:
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/147886/
Do you have a look at that patch to see whether it's sane for the
different parts between mine and yours?
Thanks,
Liming Wang
Hi,
your patch is technically identical, but I think that your commit message
ismisleading: it implies that 0xff and 0xf0 are both specified in the
CFI specification for Intel flash memory (CFI 01). As far as I could see,
0xf0 is only a specified flash command sequence for AMD flash memory
(CFI 02).
That's why Linux uses it to detect that kind of flash memory.
If you resend your patch with a commit message and a comment in
the code which explains why 0xf0 needs handling in pflash_cfi01.c,
it can be committed IMHO.
Regards
Stefan
