On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 3:43 PM Miquel Raynal <miquel.ray...@bootlin.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > On 02/07/2025 at 11:23:13 +02, Miquel Raynal <miquel.ray...@bootlin.com> > wrote: > > > These chips are internally made of two/four dies with linear addressing > > capabilities to make it transparent to the user that two/four dies were > > used. There is one drawback however, the read status operation is racy > > as the status bit only gives the active die status and not the status of > > the other die. For commands affecting the two dies, it means if another > > command is sent too fast after the first die has returned a valid > > status (deviation can be up to 200us), the chip will get corrupted/in an > > unstable state. > > > > The solution adopted here is to iterate manually over all internal > > dies (which takes about 30us per die) until all are ready. This approach > > will always be faster than a blind delay which represents the maximum > > deviation, while also being totally safe. > > > > A flash-specific hook for the status register read had to be > > implemented. Testing with the flash_speed benchmark in Linux shown no > > difference with the existing performances (using the regular status read > > core function). > > > > As the presence of multiple dies is not filled in these chips SFDP > > tables (the table containing the crucial information is optional), we > > need to manually wire the hook. > > > > This change is adapted from Linux. > > > > Link: > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250110-winbond-6-12-rc1-nor-volatile-bit-v3-1-735363f8c...@bootlin.com/ > > Signed-off-by: Miquel Raynal <miquel.ray...@bootlin.com> > > Same question for this one, no feedback for the past 2 months, I'm not > sure who's supposed to take these, Jagan and Vignesh you are marked M: > in maintainers, any chances this can get it?
Unfortunately, I was off quite some-time. Need little bit of time. Vighnesh is off for years. In the meantime, Michael will help in review but need help on testing. Thanks, Jagan.
