Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Fri, 17 Jun 2022 08:04:40 +0300
From:   Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
To:     "Oleksandr Ocheretnyi -X (oocheret - GLOBALLOGIC INC at Cisco)" 
        <oocheret@cisco.com>
Cc:     "tudor.ambarus@microchip.com" <tudor.ambarus@microchip.com>,
        "miquel.raynal@bootlin.com" <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>,
        "p.yadav@ti.com" <p.yadav@ti.com>,
        "michael@walle.cc" <michael@walle.cc>,
        "richard@nod.at" <richard@nod.at>,
        "vigneshr@ti.com" <vigneshr@ti.com>,
        "broonie@kernel.org" <broonie@kernel.org>,
        "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>,
        "linux-spi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-spi@vger.kernel.org>,
        "mauro.lima@eclypsium.com" <mauro.lima@eclypsium.com>,
        "lee.jones@linaro.org" <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "xe-linux-external(mailer list)" <xe-linux-external@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mtd: spi-nor: handle unsupported FSR opcodes properly
Message-ID: <YqwLaIvjdRBsNRuU@lahna>
References: <YqsHcL5NPcZ4De77@lahna>
 <20220616121446.293408-1-oocheret@cisco.com>
 <YqsjGx54+Gd8Aws/@lahna>
 <BYAPR11MB2757CEBE99C3A0861928CD43CDAC9@BYAPR11MB2757.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
 <YqspM2Sw+Fu9y56Z@lahna>
 <BYAPR11MB2757BD90C63B9F6A31E0600ACDAC9@BYAPR11MB2757.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <BYAPR11MB2757BD90C63B9F6A31E0600ACDAC9@BYAPR11MB2757.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 08:26:33PM +0000, Oleksandr Ocheretnyi -X (oocheret - GLOBALLOGIC INC at Cisco) wrote:
>    Hi Mika,
> 
>    >    ​However I remember you caught situation where
>    micron_st_nor_read_fsr()
>    >    returns -EOPNOTSUPP
>    >    (intel_spi_exec_mem_op callback returns -EOPNOTSUPP), according to
>    your
>    >    patch
>    >
>    [3]https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mtd/20220506105158.43613-1-mika.wester
>    >    berg@linux.intel.com/ I've noted in description body. So I think I
>    have
>    >    to cover both errorcodes, haven't I?
>    I was thinking that you change the both functions in Intel SPI to
>    return
> 
>    -ENOTSUPP, not just one.
> 
>    ​you know 'drivers/mtd/spi-nor' sources use -EOPNOTSUPP errorcode only,
>    however
> 
>    'drivers/spi' modules (where intel driver is located as well as
>    spi-mem.c) use both errorcodes many times
> 
>    (-EOPNOTSUPP and -ENOTSUPP).

Oh, indeed. I remembered that SPI-NOR core was using ENOTSUP but it was
SPI-MEM instead.

>    So maybe it is better to use -EOPNOTSUPP for intel driver file (what
>    uses -EOPNOTSUPP everywhere) and
> 
>    update the spi-mem.c with -EOPNOTSUPP as return value, how do you
>    think?

Yes, I think this is the correct approach. You need to be careful though
to make sure the callers of SPI-MEM functions do not get unexpected
values.