| Message ID | 1353794593-6147-1-git-send-email-sw@weilnetz.de |
|---|---|
| State | Under Review |
| Headers | show |
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 > >These warnings confuse users, so suppress them. > >Signed-off-by: Stefan Weil <sw@weilnetz.de> >--- > >This is strictly speaking not a bug fix, but it fixes a warning >which confuses QEMU users since a long time (see previous mails >on qemu-devel and bug report). > >It is also safe. Therefore I think it can be applied to 1.3. > >Regards >Stefan > > hw/pflash_cfi01.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > >diff --git a/hw/pflash_cfi01.c b/hw/pflash_cfi01.c >index 7d040b5..a4dbe19 100644 >--- a/hw/pflash_cfi01.c >+++ b/hw/pflash_cfi01.c >@@ -319,6 +319,9 @@ static void pflash_write(pflash_t *pfl, hwaddr offset, > DPRINTF("%s: Write to buffer\n", __func__); > pfl->status |= 0x80; /* Ready! */ > break; >+ case 0xf0: /* Probe for AMD flash */ >+ DPRINTF("%s: Probe for AMD flash\n", __func__); >+ goto reset_flash; > case 0xff: /* Read array mode */ > DPRINTF("%s: Read array mode\n", __func__); > goto reset_flash; >-- >1.7.10.4 > >
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
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) > > These warnings confuse users, so suppress them. > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Weil <sw@weilnetz.de> > --- > > This is strictly speaking not a bug fix, but it fixes a warning > which confuses QEMU users since a long time (see previous mails > on qemu-devel and bug report). > > It is also safe. Therefore I think it can be applied to 1.3. > > Regards > Stefan > > hw/pflash_cfi01.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/hw/pflash_cfi01.c b/hw/pflash_cfi01.c > index 7d040b5..a4dbe19 100644 > --- a/hw/pflash_cfi01.c > +++ b/hw/pflash_cfi01.c > @@ -319,6 +319,9 @@ static void pflash_write(pflash_t *pfl, hwaddr offset, > DPRINTF("%s: Write to buffer\n", __func__); > pfl->status |= 0x80; /* Ready! */ > break; > + case 0xf0: /* Probe for AMD flash */ > + DPRINTF("%s: Probe for AMD flash\n", __func__); > + goto reset_flash; > case 0xff: /* Read array mode */ > DPRINTF("%s: Read array mode\n", __func__); > goto reset_flash; Thanks, applied.
diff --git a/hw/pflash_cfi01.c b/hw/pflash_cfi01.c index 7d040b5..a4dbe19 100644 --- a/hw/pflash_cfi01.c +++ b/hw/pflash_cfi01.c @@ -319,6 +319,9 @@ static void pflash_write(pflash_t *pfl, hwaddr offset, DPRINTF("%s: Write to buffer\n", __func__); pfl->status |= 0x80; /* Ready! */ break; + case 0xf0: /* Probe for AMD flash */ + DPRINTF("%s: Probe for AMD flash\n", __func__); + goto reset_flash; case 0xff: /* Read array mode */ DPRINTF("%s: Read array mode\n", __func__); goto reset_flash;
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) These warnings confuse users, so suppress them. Signed-off-by: Stefan Weil <sw@weilnetz.de> --- This is strictly speaking not a bug fix, but it fixes a warning which confuses QEMU users since a long time (see previous mails on qemu-devel and bug report). It is also safe. Therefore I think it can be applied to 1.3. Regards Stefan hw/pflash_cfi01.c | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)