On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 4:15 PM Tudor Ambarus <tudor.amba...@linaro.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 10/30/24 10:33 AM, Jagan Teki wrote:
> > Hi Marek,
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 27, 2024 at 1:48 AM Marek Vasut
> > <marek.vasut+rene...@mailbox.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Remove undocumented nor->addr_width == 3 test. This was added in commit
> >> 5d40b3d384dc ("mtd: spi-nor: Add parallel and stacked memories support")
> >> without any explanation in the commit message. Remove it.
> >>
> >> This also has a bad side-effect which breaks READ operation of every SPI
> >> NOR
> >> which does not use addr_width == 3, e.g. s25fs512s does not work at all.
> >> This
> >> is because if addr_width != 3, rem_bank_len is always 0, and if
> >> rem_bank_len
> >> is 0, then read_len is 0 and if read_len is 0, then the spi_nor_read()
> >> returns
> >> -EIO.
> >>
> >> Basic reproducer is as follows:
> >> "
> >> => sf probe ; sf read 0x50000000 0 0x10000
> >> SF: Detected s25fs512s with page size 256 Bytes, erase size 256 KiB, total
> >> 64 MiB
> >> device 0 offset 0x0, size 0x10000
> >> SF: 65536 bytes @ 0x0 Read: ERROR -5
> >> "
> >>
> >> Fixes: 5d40b3d384dc ("mtd: spi-nor: Add parallel and stacked memories
> >> support")
> >> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut+rene...@mailbox.org>
> >> ---
> >> Cc: Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com>
> >> Cc: Ashok Reddy Soma <ashok.reddy.s...@amd.com>
> >> Cc: Jagan Teki <ja...@amarulasolutions.com>
> >> Cc: Michael Walle <mwa...@kernel.org>
> >> Cc: Michal Simek <michal.si...@amd.com>
> >> Cc: Patrice Chotard <patrice.chot...@foss.st.com>
> >> Cc: Patrick Delaunay <patrick.delau...@foss.st.com>
> >> Cc: Pratyush Yadav <p.ya...@ti.com>
> >> Cc: Quentin Schulz <quentin.sch...@cherry.de>
> >> Cc: Sean Anderson <sean...@gmail.com>
> >> Cc: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org>
> >> Cc: Takahiro Kuwano <takahiro.kuw...@infineon.com>
> >> Cc: Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com>
> >> Cc: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.amba...@linaro.org>
> >> Cc: Venkatesh Yadav Abbarapu <venkatesh.abbar...@amd.com>
> >> Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de
> >> Cc: uboot-st...@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com
> >> ---
> >
> > Is this patch-set next version for 'previous' reverted series?
> >
>
> my 2c: I think I lean towards reverting the stacked/parallel support.
> The only one that benefits of is AMD, while affecting the core code
> quality. It also slows down further contributions and I assume it
> hardens maintainer's job.
I did try this before and it is hard to separate from the core. and at
the same time it is hard to maintain the core too.
>
> Even if I (we?) haven't made my mind on how to best implement this, it's
> clear that it shall be above SPI NOR without affecting current devices.
>
> Not sure if it's fine to revert everything, haven't followed u-boot
> lately, your choice to make.
If we find a way (not sure if it's possible) separate like a wrapper
or fix the things without revert - these are two points I can see as
of now.
Jagan.
