| Message ID | 20230817170335.3711-1-ssunkkan@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add support for more XMC series | expand |
Hi, >> XMC parts seem to have SFDP tables and they should work out of the box >> without any patches with the generic spi nor driver [1]. Therefore, >> you don't need any entry at all. > > I think it is related to the PARSE_SFDP flag. > The XMC flash part supports SFDP, so i don’t needto add > NO_SFDP_FLAGS() macro. Correct. If the flash is working with PARSE_SFDP, it has SFDP and all the information of the flash_info table is pulled from the SFDP tables, except for the part name. Therefore, you don't need any entry at all. The flash should just work out of the box. Are you using the latest kernel? -michael
Yes, I'm using the latest kernel. > 在 2023年8月18日，01:10，Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc> 写道： > > Hi, > >>> XMC parts seem to have SFDP tables and they should work out of the box >>> without any patches with the generic spi nor driver [1]. Therefore, >>> you don't need any entry at all. >> I think it is related to the PARSE_SFDP flag. >> The XMC flash part supports SFDP, so i don’t needto add >> NO_SFDP_FLAGS() macro. > > Correct. If the flash is working with PARSE_SFDP, it has SFDP and > all the information of the flash_info table is pulled from the SFDP > tables, except for the part name. Therefore, you don't need any entry > at all. The flash should just work out of the box. Are you using the > latest kernel? > > -michael
>Hi Michael, >Since this is the first time I've submitted code to the Linux community, please forgive me for some of the missteps that I've made. >I uploaded the incorrect patch file. >In a previous e-mail you said： >XMC parts seem to have SFDP tables and they should work out of the box >without any patches with the generic spi nor driver [1]. Therefore, >you don't need any entry at all. > >I think it is related to the PARSE_SFDP flag. >The XMC flash part supports SFDP, so i don’t need to add NO_SFDP_FLAGS() macro. > drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c | 17 +++++++++++++---- > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > >diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c >index 051411e86339..e78bf11792d9 100644 >--- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c >+++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c >@@ -11,11 +11,20 @@ > static const struct flash_info xmc_nor_parts[] = { > /* XMC (Wuhan Xinxin Semiconductor Manufacturing Corp.) */ > { "XM25QH64A", INFO(0x207017, 0, 64 * 1024, 128) >- NO_SFDP_FLAGS(SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | >- SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ) }, >+ PARSE_SFDP }, > { "XM25QH128A", INFO(0x207018, 0, 64 * 1024, 256) >- NO_SFDP_FLAGS(SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | >- SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ) }, >+ PARSE_SFDP }, >+ { "XM25QH128C", INFO(0x204018, 0, 64 * 1024, 256) >+ PARSE_SFDP }, >+ { "XM25QH256C", INFO(0x204019, 0, 64 * 1024, 512) >+ PARSE_SFDP }, >+ { "XM25QU256C", INFO(0x204119, 0, 64 * 1024, 512) >+ PARSE_SFDP }, >+ { "XM25QH512C", INFO(0x204020, 0, 64 * 1024, 1024) >+ PARSE_SFDP }, >+ { "XM25QU512C", INFO(0x204120, 0, 64 * 1024, 1024) >+ PARSE_SFDP }, >+ > }; > > const struct spi_nor_manufacturer spi_nor_xmc = { >> Correct. If the flash is working with PARSE_SFDP, it has SFDP and >> all the information of the flash_info table is pulled from the SFDP >> tables, except for the part name. Therefore, you don't need any entry >> at all. The flash should just work out of the box. Are you using the >> latest kernel? >> >> -michael -- Hi Michael, According to you, does this piece of my code still need to be modified? Thanks, Ssunk
Am 2023-08-29 06:56, schrieb SSunk: >> Hi Michael, >> Since this is the first time I've submitted code to the Linux >> community, please forgive me for some of the missteps that I've made. >> I uploaded the incorrect patch file. >> In a previous e-mail you said： >> XMC parts seem to have SFDP tables and they should work out of the box >> without any patches with the generic spi nor driver [1]. Therefore, >> you don't need any entry at all. >> >> I think it is related to the PARSE_SFDP flag. >> The XMC flash part supports SFDP, so i don’t need to add >> NO_SFDP_FLAGS() macro. >> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c | 17 +++++++++++++---- >> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c >> index 051411e86339..e78bf11792d9 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c >> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c >> @@ -11,11 +11,20 @@ >> static const struct flash_info xmc_nor_parts[] = { >> /* XMC (Wuhan Xinxin Semiconductor Manufacturing Corp.) */ >> { "XM25QH64A", INFO(0x207017, 0, 64 * 1024, 128) >> - NO_SFDP_FLAGS(SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | >> - SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ) }, >> + PARSE_SFDP }, >> { "XM25QH128A", INFO(0x207018, 0, 64 * 1024, 256) >> - NO_SFDP_FLAGS(SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | >> - SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ) }, >> + PARSE_SFDP }, >> + { "XM25QH128C", INFO(0x204018, 0, 64 * 1024, 256) >> + PARSE_SFDP }, >> + { "XM25QH256C", INFO(0x204019, 0, 64 * 1024, 512) >> + PARSE_SFDP }, >> + { "XM25QU256C", INFO(0x204119, 0, 64 * 1024, 512) >> + PARSE_SFDP }, >> + { "XM25QH512C", INFO(0x204020, 0, 64 * 1024, 1024) >> + PARSE_SFDP }, >> + { "XM25QU512C", INFO(0x204120, 0, 64 * 1024, 1024) >> + PARSE_SFDP }, >> + >> }; >> >> const struct spi_nor_manufacturer spi_nor_xmc = { >>> Correct. If the flash is working with PARSE_SFDP, it has SFDP and >>> all the information of the flash_info table is pulled from the SFDP >>> tables, except for the part name. Therefore, you don't need any entry >>> at all. The flash should just work out of the box. Are you using the >>> latest kernel? >>> >>> -michael > -- > Hi Michael, > > According to you, does this piece of my code still need to be modified? You don't need it at all. The flash will work as is - that is without that piece of code. -michael
>>> Hi Michael, >>> Since this is the first time I've submitted code to the Linux >>> community, please forgive me for some of the missteps that I've made. >>> I uploaded the incorrect patch file. >>> In a previous e-mail you said： >>> XMC parts seem to have SFDP tables and they should work out of the box >>> without any patches with the generic spi nor driver [1]. Therefore, >>> you don't need any entry at all. >>> >>> I think it is related to the PARSE_SFDP flag. >>> The XMC flash part supports SFDP, so i don’t need to add >>> NO_SFDP_FLAGS() macro. >>> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c | 17 +++++++++++++---- >>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c >>> index 051411e86339..e78bf11792d9 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c >>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c >>> @@ -11,11 +11,20 @@ >>> static const struct flash_info xmc_nor_parts[] = { >>> /* XMC (Wuhan Xinxin Semiconductor Manufacturing Corp.) */ >>> { "XM25QH64A", INFO(0x207017, 0, 64 * 1024, 128) >>> - NO_SFDP_FLAGS(SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | >>> - SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ) }, >>> + PARSE_SFDP }, >>> { "XM25QH128A", INFO(0x207018, 0, 64 * 1024, 256) >>> - NO_SFDP_FLAGS(SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | >>> - SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ) }, >>> + PARSE_SFDP }, >>> + { "XM25QH128C", INFO(0x204018, 0, 64 * 1024, 256) >>> + PARSE_SFDP }, >>> + { "XM25QH256C", INFO(0x204019, 0, 64 * 1024, 512) >>> + PARSE_SFDP }, >>> + { "XM25QU256C", INFO(0x204119, 0, 64 * 1024, 512) >>> + PARSE_SFDP }, >>> + { "XM25QH512C", INFO(0x204020, 0, 64 * 1024, 1024) >>> + PARSE_SFDP }, >>> + { "XM25QU512C", INFO(0x204120, 0, 64 * 1024, 1024) >>> + PARSE_SFDP }, >>> + >>> }; >>> >>> const struct spi_nor_manufacturer spi_nor_xmc = { >>>> Correct. If the flash is working with PARSE_SFDP, it has SFDP and >>>> all the information of the flash_info table is pulled from the SFDP >>>> tables, except for the part name. Therefore, you don't need any entry >>>> at all. The flash should just work out of the box. Are you using the >>>> latest kernel? >>>> >>>> -michael >> -- >> Hi Michael, >> >> According to you, does this piece of my code still need to be modified? > >You don't need it at all. The flash will work as is - that is without >that >piece of code. > >-michael -- Hi michael, If these entries are not added, the flash part name is unknown and our customers cannot see our flash part name on the kernel log. So,I think it's necessary to add these entries. Thanks
Hi, >>>> Since this is the first time I've submitted code to the Linux >>>> community, please forgive me for some of the missteps that I've >>>> made. >>>> I uploaded the incorrect patch file. >>>> In a previous e-mail you said： >>>> XMC parts seem to have SFDP tables and they should work out of the >>>> box >>>> without any patches with the generic spi nor driver [1]. Therefore, >>>> you don't need any entry at all. >>>> >>>> I think it is related to the PARSE_SFDP flag. >>>> The XMC flash part supports SFDP, so i don’t need to add >>>> NO_SFDP_FLAGS() macro. >>>> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c | 17 +++++++++++++---- >>>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c >>>> index 051411e86339..e78bf11792d9 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c >>>> @@ -11,11 +11,20 @@ >>>> static const struct flash_info xmc_nor_parts[] = { >>>> /* XMC (Wuhan Xinxin Semiconductor Manufacturing Corp.) */ >>>> { "XM25QH64A", INFO(0x207017, 0, 64 * 1024, 128) >>>> - NO_SFDP_FLAGS(SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | >>>> - SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ) }, >>>> + PARSE_SFDP }, >>>> { "XM25QH128A", INFO(0x207018, 0, 64 * 1024, 256) >>>> - NO_SFDP_FLAGS(SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | >>>> - SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ) }, >>>> + PARSE_SFDP }, >>>> + { "XM25QH128C", INFO(0x204018, 0, 64 * 1024, 256) >>>> + PARSE_SFDP }, >>>> + { "XM25QH256C", INFO(0x204019, 0, 64 * 1024, 512) >>>> + PARSE_SFDP }, >>>> + { "XM25QU256C", INFO(0x204119, 0, 64 * 1024, 512) >>>> + PARSE_SFDP }, >>>> + { "XM25QH512C", INFO(0x204020, 0, 64 * 1024, 1024) >>>> + PARSE_SFDP }, >>>> + { "XM25QU512C", INFO(0x204120, 0, 64 * 1024, 1024) >>>> + PARSE_SFDP }, >>>> + >>>> }; >>>> >>>> const struct spi_nor_manufacturer spi_nor_xmc = { >>>>> Correct. If the flash is working with PARSE_SFDP, it has SFDP and >>>>> all the information of the flash_info table is pulled from the SFDP >>>>> tables, except for the part name. Therefore, you don't need any >>>>> entry >>>>> at all. The flash should just work out of the box. Are you using >>>>> the >>>>> latest kernel? >>>>> >>>>> -michael >>> -- >>> Hi Michael, >>> >>> According to you, does this piece of my code still need to be >>> modified? >> >> You don't need it at all. The flash will work as is - that is without >> that >> piece of code. >> >> -michael > -- > Hi michael, > > If these entries are not added, the flash part name is unknown and our > customers > cannot see our flash part name on the kernel log. > So,I think it's necessary to add these entries. They can still see the jedec id in the sysfs. We don't add entries just for the names. Sorry. -michael
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c index 051411e86339..e78bf11792d9 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c @@ -11,11 +11,20 @@ static const struct flash_info xmc_nor_parts[] = { /* XMC (Wuhan Xinxin Semiconductor Manufacturing Corp.) */ { "XM25QH64A", INFO(0x207017, 0, 64 * 1024, 128) - NO_SFDP_FLAGS(SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | - SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ) }, + PARSE_SFDP }, { "XM25QH128A", INFO(0x207018, 0, 64 * 1024, 256) - NO_SFDP_FLAGS(SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | - SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ) }, + PARSE_SFDP }, + { "XM25QH128C", INFO(0x204018, 0, 64 * 1024, 256) + PARSE_SFDP }, + { "XM25QH256C", INFO(0x204019, 0, 64 * 1024, 512) + PARSE_SFDP }, + { "XM25QU256C", INFO(0x204119, 0, 64 * 1024, 512) + PARSE_SFDP }, + { "XM25QH512C", INFO(0x204020, 0, 64 * 1024, 1024) + PARSE_SFDP }, + { "XM25QU512C", INFO(0x204120, 0, 64 * 1024, 1024) + PARSE_SFDP }, + }; const struct spi_nor_manufacturer spi_nor_xmc = {
Add XMC XM25QH128C/XM25QH256C/XM25QU256C/XM25QH512C/XM25QU512C and set the parse_sfdp flag. Signed-off-by: Kankan Sun <ssunkkan@gmail.com> --- Hi Michael, Since this is the first time I've submitted code to the Linux community, please forgive me for some of the missteps that I've made. I uploaded the incorrect patch file. In a previous e-mail you said： XMC parts seem to have SFDP tables and they should work out of the box without any patches with the generic spi nor driver [1]. Therefore, you don't need any entry at all. I think it is related to the PARSE_SFDP flag. The XMC flash part supports SFDP, so i don’t need to add NO_SFDP_FLAGS() macro. drivers/mtd/spi-nor/xmc.c | 17 +++++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)