Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758839AbcLBNSH (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Dec 2016 08:18:07 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-f68.google.com ([74.125.82.68]:35957 "EHLO mail-wm0-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752480AbcLBNSG (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Dec 2016 08:18:06 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH v8] mtd: spi-nor: Add support for S3AN spi-nor devices To: Ricardo Ribalda Delgado References: <20161124165608.29816-1-ricardo.ribalda@gmail.com> <1e8b99b6-1110-70ae-e299-1c2c153a1908@gmail.com> Cc: Cyrille Pitchen , David Woodhouse , Brian Norris , Boris Brezillon , Richard Weinberger , "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" , LKML From: Marek Vasut Message-ID: <1ab20bad-e044-8bba-cbb2-21dfd799b719@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2016 13:46:47 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1750 Lines: 55 On 12/02/2016 11:52 AM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote: > Hi Marek Hi, > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 7:11 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: >> On 12/01/2016 06:52 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote: >>> Hi Marek >> >> Hi, >> >>> Thanks for your review >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 5:05 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: >>>> >>>> On 11/24/2016 05:56 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote: >>> >>>>> +#define SPI_S3AN BIT(10) /* >>>>> + * Xilinx Spartan 3AN In-System Flash >>>>> + * (MFR cannot be used for probing >>>>> + * because it has the same value as >>>>> + * ATMEL flashes) >>>>> + */ >>>> >>>> I have possibly off-topic question. Altera has something very similar -- >>>> EPCS/EPCQ flash which cannot be detected using standard READID . >>>> Would this patch help with supporting those degenerate flashes too? >>>> >>>>> }; >>>>> >>> >>> I dont know, but I love the term degenerated flash, please let me use it :) >> >> Hehe. It'd be great to know whether we don't have a possibility for a >> generic usecase here. Can you briefly check that ? > > I have taken a brief look to > https://www.altera.com/content/dam/altera-www/global/en_US/pdfs/literature/hb/cfg/cfg_cf52012.pdf > > and they seem different enough to not reuse the flag :(. OK, fine, thanks for checking. >>> I guess they are using some bits reserved to ECC for data and that way >>> you can squeeze some bits for user data. >> >> OK, comment could help clarify this, so please add one. > > Will send a v9 Thanks! -- Best regards, Marek Vasut