There are 2 different chips (w25q256fv and w25q256jv) that share
the same JEDEC ID. Only w25q256jv fully supports 4-byte opcodes.
Use SFDP header version to differentiate between them.
Signed-off-by: Mantas Pucka <[email protected]>
---
drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c | 4 ----
drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h | 6 ++++++
drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c
index f6038d3..27838f6 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c
@@ -21,10 +21,6 @@
#define SFDP_4BAIT_ID 0xff84 /* 4-byte Address Instruction Table */
#define SFDP_SIGNATURE 0x50444653U
-#define SFDP_JESD216_MAJOR 1
-#define SFDP_JESD216_MINOR 0
-#define SFDP_JESD216A_MINOR 5
-#define SFDP_JESD216B_MINOR 6
struct sfdp_header {
u32 signature; /* Ox50444653U <=> "SFDP" */
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h
index e0a8ded..b84abd0 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h
+++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h
@@ -7,6 +7,12 @@
#ifndef __LINUX_MTD_SFDP_H
#define __LINUX_MTD_SFDP_H
+/* SFDP revisions */
+#define SFDP_JESD216_MAJOR 1
+#define SFDP_JESD216_MINOR 0
+#define SFDP_JESD216A_MINOR 5
+#define SFDP_JESD216B_MINOR 6
+
/* Basic Flash Parameter Table */
/*
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
index 17deaba..50b2478 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
@@ -8,6 +8,32 @@
#include "core.h"
+static int
+w25q256_post_bfpt_fixups(struct spi_nor *nor,
+ const struct sfdp_parameter_header *bfpt_header,
+ const struct sfdp_bfpt *bfpt,
+ struct spi_nor_flash_parameter *params)
+{
+ /*
+ * W25Q256JV supports 4B opcodes but W25Q256FV does not.
+ * Unfortunately, Winbond has re-used the same JEDEC ID for both
+ * variants which prevents us from defining a new entry in the parts
+ * table.
+ * To differentiate between W25Q256JV and W25Q256FV check SFDP header
+ * version: only JV has JESD216A compliant structure (version 5)
+ */
+
+ if (bfpt_header->major == SFDP_JESD216_MAJOR &&
+ bfpt_header->minor == SFDP_JESD216A_MINOR)
+ nor->flags |= SNOR_F_4B_OPCODES;
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static struct spi_nor_fixups w25q256_fixups = {
+ .post_bfpt = w25q256_post_bfpt_fixups,
+};
+
static const struct flash_info winbond_parts[] = {
/* Winbond -- w25x "blocks" are 64K, "sectors" are 4KiB */
{ "w25x05", INFO(0xef3010, 0, 64 * 1024, 1, SECT_4K) },
@@ -53,8 +79,8 @@ static const struct flash_info winbond_parts[] = {
{ "w25q80bl", INFO(0xef4014, 0, 64 * 1024, 16, SECT_4K) },
{ "w25q128", INFO(0xef4018, 0, 64 * 1024, 256, SECT_4K) },
{ "w25q256", INFO(0xef4019, 0, 64 * 1024, 512,
- SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ |
- SPI_NOR_4B_OPCODES) },
+ SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ)
+ .fixups = &w25q256_fixups },
{ "w25q256jvm", INFO(0xef7019, 0, 64 * 1024, 512,
SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ) },
{ "w25q256jw", INFO(0xef6019, 0, 64 * 1024, 512,
--
2.7.4
On Wednesday, April 15, 2020 4:48:30 PM EEST Mantas Pucka wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the
> content is safe
>
> There are 2 different chips (w25q256fv and w25q256jv) that share
> the same JEDEC ID. Only w25q256jv fully supports 4-byte opcodes.
> Use SFDP header version to differentiate between them.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mantas Pucka <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c | 4 ----
> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h | 6 ++++++
> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c
> index f6038d3..27838f6 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c
> @@ -21,10 +21,6 @@
> #define SFDP_4BAIT_ID 0xff84 /* 4-byte Address Instruction Table
> */
>
> #define SFDP_SIGNATURE 0x50444653U
> -#define SFDP_JESD216_MAJOR 1
> -#define SFDP_JESD216_MINOR 0
> -#define SFDP_JESD216A_MINOR 5
> -#define SFDP_JESD216B_MINOR 6
>
> struct sfdp_header {
> u32 signature; /* Ox50444653U <=> "SFDP" */
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h
> index e0a8ded..b84abd0 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h
> @@ -7,6 +7,12 @@
> #ifndef __LINUX_MTD_SFDP_H
> #define __LINUX_MTD_SFDP_H
>
> +/* SFDP revisions */
> +#define SFDP_JESD216_MAJOR 1
> +#define SFDP_JESD216_MINOR 0
> +#define SFDP_JESD216A_MINOR 5
> +#define SFDP_JESD216B_MINOR 6
> +
> /* Basic Flash Parameter Table */
>
> /*
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
> index 17deaba..50b2478 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
> @@ -8,6 +8,32 @@
>
> #include "core.h"
>
> +static int
> +w25q256_post_bfpt_fixups(struct spi_nor *nor,
> + const struct sfdp_parameter_header *bfpt_header,
> + const struct sfdp_bfpt *bfpt,
> + struct spi_nor_flash_parameter *params)
> +{
> + /*
> + * W25Q256JV supports 4B opcodes but W25Q256FV does not.
> + * Unfortunately, Winbond has re-used the same JEDEC ID for both
> + * variants which prevents us from defining a new entry in the parts
> + * table.
> + * To differentiate between W25Q256JV and W25Q256FV check SFDP
> header + * version: only JV has JESD216A compliant structure
> (version 5) + */
> +
> + if (bfpt_header->major == SFDP_JESD216_MAJOR &&
> + bfpt_header->minor == SFDP_JESD216A_MINOR)
Not sure if this is generic enough. Are you sure that the JV version will
never have an update for the sfdp tables?
> + nor->flags |= SNOR_F_4B_OPCODES;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static struct spi_nor_fixups w25q256_fixups = {
> + .post_bfpt = w25q256_post_bfpt_fixups,
> +};
> +
If the post_bfpt hook is called, you already have a valid bfpt table. If the
differentiator between the JV and FV versions is that only the JV defines the
SFDP tables, then your w25q256_post_bfpt_fixups() can look as:
static int w25q256_post_bfpt_fixups()
{
nor->flags |= SNOR_F_4B_OPCODES;
return 0;
}
Cheers,
ta
On 2020-04-20 13:53, [email protected] wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 15, 2020 4:48:30 PM EEST Mantas Pucka wrote:
>> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the
>> content is safe
>>
>> There are 2 different chips (w25q256fv and w25q256jv) that share
>> the same JEDEC ID. Only w25q256jv fully supports 4-byte opcodes.
>> Use SFDP header version to differentiate between them.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mantas Pucka <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c | 4 ----
>> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h | 6 ++++++
>> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>> 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c
>> index f6038d3..27838f6 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c
>> @@ -21,10 +21,6 @@
>> #define SFDP_4BAIT_ID 0xff84 /* 4-byte Address Instruction Table
>> */
>>
>> #define SFDP_SIGNATURE 0x50444653U
>> -#define SFDP_JESD216_MAJOR 1
>> -#define SFDP_JESD216_MINOR 0
>> -#define SFDP_JESD216A_MINOR 5
>> -#define SFDP_JESD216B_MINOR 6
>>
>> struct sfdp_header {
>> u32 signature; /* Ox50444653U <=> "SFDP" */
>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h
>> index e0a8ded..b84abd0 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h
>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h
>> @@ -7,6 +7,12 @@
>> #ifndef __LINUX_MTD_SFDP_H
>> #define __LINUX_MTD_SFDP_H
>>
>> +/* SFDP revisions */
>> +#define SFDP_JESD216_MAJOR 1
>> +#define SFDP_JESD216_MINOR 0
>> +#define SFDP_JESD216A_MINOR 5
>> +#define SFDP_JESD216B_MINOR 6
>> +
>> /* Basic Flash Parameter Table */
>>
>> /*
>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
>> index 17deaba..50b2478 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
>> @@ -8,6 +8,32 @@
>>
>> #include "core.h"
>>
>> +static int
>> +w25q256_post_bfpt_fixups(struct spi_nor *nor,
>> + const struct sfdp_parameter_header *bfpt_header,
>> + const struct sfdp_bfpt *bfpt,
>> + struct spi_nor_flash_parameter *params)
>> +{
>> + /*
>> + * W25Q256JV supports 4B opcodes but W25Q256FV does not.
>> + * Unfortunately, Winbond has re-used the same JEDEC ID for both
>> + * variants which prevents us from defining a new entry in the parts
>> + * table.
>> + * To differentiate between W25Q256JV and W25Q256FV check SFDP
>> header + * version: only JV has JESD216A compliant structure
>> (version 5) + */
>> +
>> + if (bfpt_header->major == SFDP_JESD216_MAJOR &&
>> + bfpt_header->minor == SFDP_JESD216A_MINOR)
>
> Not sure if this is generic enough. Are you sure that the JV version will
> never have an update for the sfdp tables?
>
No, I'm not sure. I also don't know about other changes that may come
with a version update: will it have 4B opcode table? will it be
different version again (say KV) with it's own quirks? Fix only what
needs fixing was the idea. But I guess chances of new chip with no 4B
opcodes and new SFDP table are pretty slim, so I'm OK with having >= in v2.
>> + nor->flags |= SNOR_F_4B_OPCODES;
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static struct spi_nor_fixups w25q256_fixups = {
>> + .post_bfpt = w25q256_post_bfpt_fixups,
>> +};
>> +
>
> If the post_bfpt hook is called, you already have a valid bfpt table. If the
> differentiator between the JV and FV versions is that only the JV defines the
> SFDP tables, then your w25q256_post_bfpt_fixups() can look as:
>
> static int w25q256_post_bfpt_fixups()
> {
> nor->flags |= SNOR_F_4B_OPCODES;
> return 0;
> }
FV chip that I have, do actually have SFDP tables (with
minor_version==0). I've saw Chuanhong reporting that some FV chips don't
have SFDP, but certainly this is not the case for all of them.
Best regards,
Mantas
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 9:08:30 AM EEST Mantas wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the
> content is safe
> On 2020-04-20 13:53, [email protected] wrote:
> > On Wednesday, April 15, 2020 4:48:30 PM EEST Mantas Pucka wrote:
> >> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know
> >> the
> >> content is safe
> >>
> >> There are 2 different chips (w25q256fv and w25q256jv) that share
> >> the same JEDEC ID. Only w25q256jv fully supports 4-byte opcodes.
> >> Use SFDP header version to differentiate between them.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Mantas Pucka <[email protected]>
> >> ---
> >>
> >> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c | 4 ----
> >> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h | 6 ++++++
> >> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> >> 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c
> >> index f6038d3..27838f6 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c
> >> @@ -21,10 +21,6 @@
> >>
> >> #define SFDP_4BAIT_ID 0xff84 /* 4-byte Address Instruction
> >> Table
> >>
> >> */
> >>
> >> #define SFDP_SIGNATURE 0x50444653U
> >>
> >> -#define SFDP_JESD216_MAJOR 1
> >> -#define SFDP_JESD216_MINOR 0
> >> -#define SFDP_JESD216A_MINOR 5
> >> -#define SFDP_JESD216B_MINOR 6
> >>
> >> struct sfdp_header {
> >>
> >> u32 signature; /* Ox50444653U <=> "SFDP" */
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h
> >> index e0a8ded..b84abd0 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h
> >> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h
> >> @@ -7,6 +7,12 @@
> >>
> >> #ifndef __LINUX_MTD_SFDP_H
> >> #define __LINUX_MTD_SFDP_H
> >>
> >> +/* SFDP revisions */
> >> +#define SFDP_JESD216_MAJOR 1
> >> +#define SFDP_JESD216_MINOR 0
> >> +#define SFDP_JESD216A_MINOR 5
> >> +#define SFDP_JESD216B_MINOR 6
> >> +
> >>
> >> /* Basic Flash Parameter Table */
> >>
> >> /*
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
> >> b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
> >> index 17deaba..50b2478 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c
> >> @@ -8,6 +8,32 @@
> >>
> >> #include "core.h"
> >>
> >> +static int
> >> +w25q256_post_bfpt_fixups(struct spi_nor *nor,
> >> + const struct sfdp_parameter_header *bfpt_header,
> >> + const struct sfdp_bfpt *bfpt,
> >> + struct spi_nor_flash_parameter *params)
> >> +{
> >> + /*
> >> + * W25Q256JV supports 4B opcodes but W25Q256FV does not.
> >> + * Unfortunately, Winbond has re-used the same JEDEC ID for both
> >> + * variants which prevents us from defining a new entry in the
> >> parts + * table.
> >> + * To differentiate between W25Q256JV and W25Q256FV check SFDP
> >> header + * version: only JV has JESD216A compliant structure
> >> (version 5) + */
> >> +
> >> + if (bfpt_header->major == SFDP_JESD216_MAJOR &&
> >> + bfpt_header->minor == SFDP_JESD216A_MINOR)
> >
> > Not sure if this is generic enough. Are you sure that the JV version will
> > never have an update for the sfdp tables?
>
> No, I'm not sure. I also don't know about other changes that may come
> with a version update: will it have 4B opcode table? will it be
new 4bait table will just OR the SNOR_F_4B_OPCODES flags, no problem with
that.
> different version again (say KV) with it's own quirks? Fix only what
> needs fixing was the idea. But I guess chances of new chip with no 4B
> opcodes and new SFDP table are pretty slim, so I'm OK with having >= in v2.
stripping 4B opcodes from a revision to another would be a first, but you're
right, we can fix others when needed, so no need for a v2.
>
> >> + nor->flags |= SNOR_F_4B_OPCODES;
> >> +
> >> + return 0;
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> +static struct spi_nor_fixups w25q256_fixups = {
> >> + .post_bfpt = w25q256_post_bfpt_fixups,
> >> +};
> >> +
> >
> > If the post_bfpt hook is called, you already have a valid bfpt table. If
> > the differentiator between the JV and FV versions is that only the JV
> > defines the SFDP tables, then your w25q256_post_bfpt_fixups() can look
> > as:
> >
> > static int w25q256_post_bfpt_fixups()
> > {
> >
> > nor->flags |= SNOR_F_4B_OPCODES;
> > return 0;
> >
> > }
>
> FV chip that I have, do actually have SFDP tables (with
> minor_version==0). I've saw Chuanhong reporting that some FV chips don't
> have SFDP, but certainly this is not the case for all of them.
>
oh, the horror :). I think I have a w25q256 somewhere, allow me some time to
do some tests.
Cheers,
ta
On Wednesday, April 15, 2020 4:48:30 PM EEST Mantas Pucka wrote:
> There are 2 different chips (w25q256fv and w25q256jv) that share
> the same JEDEC ID. Only w25q256jv fully supports 4-byte opcodes.
> Use SFDP header version to differentiate between them.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mantas Pucka <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.c | 4 ----
> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/sfdp.h | 6 ++++++
> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/winbond.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
Added Fixes tag, plus other minor cosmetic changes. Applied, thanks.