In the commit 08968041bef437ec363623cd3218c2b083537ada
(mtd: cfi_cmdset_0002: make sector erase command variable)
introdused a field sector_erase_cmd. In the same commit initialisation
of cfi->sector_erase_cmd made in cfi_chip_setup()
(file drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_probe.c), so the CFI chip has no problem:
...
cfi->cfi_mode = CFI_MODE_CFI;
cfi->sector_erase_cmd = CMD(0x30);
...
But for the JEDEC chips this initialisation is not carried out,
so the JEDEC chips have sector_erase_cmd == 0.
It's not possible symply add the line
p_cfi->sector_erase_cmd = CMD(0x30);
to the cfi_jedec_setup() function be cause CMD() macros needs
map and cfi variables. So this patch makes necessary changes.
Signed-off-by: Antony Pavlov <[email protected]>
---
drivers/mtd/chips/jedec_probe.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++-----------------
1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/chips/jedec_probe.c b/drivers/mtd/chips/jedec_probe.c
index d72a5fb..4e1be51 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/chips/jedec_probe.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/chips/jedec_probe.c
@@ -1935,14 +1935,14 @@ static void jedec_reset(u32 base, struct map_info *map, struct cfi_private *cfi)
}
-static int cfi_jedec_setup(struct cfi_private *p_cfi, int index)
+static int cfi_jedec_setup(struct map_info *map, struct cfi_private *cfi, int index)
{
int i,num_erase_regions;
uint8_t uaddr;
- if (! (jedec_table[index].devtypes & p_cfi->device_type)) {
+ if (!(jedec_table[index].devtypes & cfi->device_type)) {
DEBUG(MTD_DEBUG_LEVEL1, "Rejecting potential %s with incompatible %d-bit device type\n",
- jedec_table[index].name, 4 * (1<<p_cfi->device_type));
+ jedec_table[index].name, 4 * (1<<cfi->device_type));
return 0;
}
@@ -1950,27 +1950,28 @@ static int cfi_jedec_setup(struct cfi_private *p_cfi, int index)
num_erase_regions = jedec_table[index].nr_regions;
- p_cfi->cfiq = kmalloc(sizeof(struct cfi_ident) + num_erase_regions * 4, GFP_KERNEL);
- if (!p_cfi->cfiq) {
+ cfi->cfiq = kmalloc(sizeof(struct cfi_ident) + num_erase_regions * 4, GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!cfi->cfiq) {
//xx printk(KERN_WARNING "%s: kmalloc failed for CFI ident structure\n", map->name);
return 0;
}
- memset(p_cfi->cfiq,0,sizeof(struct cfi_ident));
+ memset(cfi->cfiq, 0, sizeof(struct cfi_ident));
- p_cfi->cfiq->P_ID = jedec_table[index].cmd_set;
- p_cfi->cfiq->NumEraseRegions = jedec_table[index].nr_regions;
- p_cfi->cfiq->DevSize = jedec_table[index].dev_size;
- p_cfi->cfi_mode = CFI_MODE_JEDEC;
+ cfi->cfiq->P_ID = jedec_table[index].cmd_set;
+ cfi->cfiq->NumEraseRegions = jedec_table[index].nr_regions;
+ cfi->cfiq->DevSize = jedec_table[index].dev_size;
+ cfi->cfi_mode = CFI_MODE_JEDEC;
+ cfi->sector_erase_cmd = CMD(0x30);
for (i=0; i<num_erase_regions; i++){
- p_cfi->cfiq->EraseRegionInfo[i] = jedec_table[index].regions[i];
+ cfi->cfiq->EraseRegionInfo[i] = jedec_table[index].regions[i];
}
- p_cfi->cmdset_priv = NULL;
+ cfi->cmdset_priv = NULL;
/* This may be redundant for some cases, but it doesn't hurt */
- p_cfi->mfr = jedec_table[index].mfr_id;
- p_cfi->id = jedec_table[index].dev_id;
+ cfi->mfr = jedec_table[index].mfr_id;
+ cfi->id = jedec_table[index].dev_id;
uaddr = jedec_table[index].uaddr;
@@ -1978,8 +1979,8 @@ static int cfi_jedec_setup(struct cfi_private *p_cfi, int index)
our brains explode when we see the datasheets talking about address
lines numbered from A-1 to A18. The CFI table has unlock addresses
in device-words according to the mode the device is connected in */
- p_cfi->addr_unlock1 = unlock_addrs[uaddr].addr1 / p_cfi->device_type;
- p_cfi->addr_unlock2 = unlock_addrs[uaddr].addr2 / p_cfi->device_type;
+ cfi->addr_unlock1 = unlock_addrs[uaddr].addr1 / cfi->device_type;
+ cfi->addr_unlock2 = unlock_addrs[uaddr].addr2 / cfi->device_type;
return 1; /* ok */
}
@@ -2175,7 +2176,7 @@ static int jedec_probe_chip(struct map_info *map, __u32 base,
"MTD %s(): matched device 0x%x,0x%x unlock_addrs: 0x%.4x 0x%.4x\n",
__func__, cfi->mfr, cfi->id,
cfi->addr_unlock1, cfi->addr_unlock2 );
- if (!cfi_jedec_setup(cfi, i))
+ if (!cfi_jedec_setup(map, cfi, i))
return 0;
goto ok_out;
}
--
1.7.1
Hello.
2011/2/11 Antony Pavlov <[email protected]>:
> In the commit 08968041bef437ec363623cd3218c2b083537ada
> (mtd: cfi_cmdset_0002: make sector erase command variable)
> introdused a field sector_erase_cmd. In the same commit initialisation
> of cfi->sector_erase_cmd made in cfi_chip_setup()
> (file drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_probe.c), so the CFI chip has no problem:
>
> ...
> cfi->cfi_mode = CFI_MODE_CFI;
> cfi->sector_erase_cmd = CMD(0x30);
> ...
>
> But for the JEDEC chips this initialisation is not carried out,
> so the JEDEC chips have sector_erase_cmd == 0.
>
> It's not possible symply add the line
> p_cfi->sector_erase_cmd = CMD(0x30);
> to the cfi_jedec_setup() function be cause CMD() macros needs
> map and cfi variables. So this patch makes necessary changes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Antony Pavlov <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Guillaume LECERF <[email protected]>
--
Guillaume LECERF
GeeXboX developer - http://www.geexbox.org
On Fri, 2011-02-11 at 13:00 +0300, Antony Pavlov wrote:
> In the commit 08968041bef437ec363623cd3218c2b083537ada
> (mtd: cfi_cmdset_0002: make sector erase command variable)
> introdused a field sector_erase_cmd. In the same commit initialisation
> of cfi->sector_erase_cmd made in cfi_chip_setup()
> (file drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_probe.c), so the CFI chip has no problem:
>
> ...
> cfi->cfi_mode = CFI_MODE_CFI;
> cfi->sector_erase_cmd = CMD(0x30);
> ...
>
> But for the JEDEC chips this initialisation is not carried out,
> so the JEDEC chips have sector_erase_cmd == 0.
>
> It's not possible symply add the line
> p_cfi->sector_erase_cmd = CMD(0x30);
> to the cfi_jedec_setup() function be cause CMD() macros needs
> map and cfi variables. So this patch makes necessary changes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Antony Pavlov <[email protected]>
Pushed to l2-mtd-2.6.git, thanks.
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)
Hi.
2011/2/11 Artem Bityutskiy <[email protected]>:
> Pushed to l2-mtd-2.6.git, thanks.
Maybe it should be sent to -stable ?
--
Guillaume LECERF
GeeXboX developer - http://www.geexbox.org
On Mon, 2011-02-14 at 11:16 +0100, Guillaume LECERF wrote:
> Hi.
>
> 2011/2/11 Artem Bityutskiy <[email protected]>:
> > Pushed to l2-mtd-2.6.git, thanks.
>
> Maybe it should be sent to -stable ?
OK, I'll add a "cc stable" tag,
thanks.
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)