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:   Sun, 20 Nov 2022 16:11:58 +0100
From:   Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@kernel.org>
To:     Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@kernel.org>
Cc:     linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, tudor.ambarus@microchip.com,
        michael@walle.cc, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Niravkumar L Rabara <niravkumar.l.rabara@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] mtd: spi-nor: macronix: Add support for mx66u1g45g
Message-ID: <20221120151158.p5jukj7r6yj5t7sm@yadavpratyush.com>
References: <20221111164015.165581-1-dinguyen@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20221111164015.165581-1-dinguyen@kernel.org>
Precedence: bulk

On 11/11/22 10:40AM, Dinh Nguyen wrote:
> The MX66U1G45G is the smaller sibling (128MB) of the MX66U2G45G (256MB)
> that is already supported.
> 
> Tested on Intel N5X socdk board,
>   - random data write, erase, read   - verified erase operations
>   - random data write, read and compare  - verified write/read operations
> 
> Signed-off-by: Niravkumar L Rabara <niravkumar.l.rabara@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@kernel.org>
> ---
> v2: fixed compile error by removing , after PARSE_SFDP
> ---
>  drivers/mtd/spi-nor/macronix.c | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/macronix.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/macronix.c
> index d81a4cb2812b..07ace9da74b7 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/macronix.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/macronix.c
> @@ -97,6 +97,10 @@ static const struct flash_info macronix_nor_parts[] = {
>  			      SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ) },
>  	{ "mx66l1g55g",  INFO(0xc2261b, 0, 64 * 1024, 2048)
>  		NO_SFDP_FLAGS(SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ) },
> +	{ "mx66u1g45g",  INFO(0xc2253b, 0, 64 * 1024, 2048)
> +		PARSE_SFDP
> +		FLAGS(SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ)
> +		FIXUP_FLAGS(SPI_NOR_4B_OPCODES) },

Why do you need these extra flags? Can't they be discovered by parsing 
the SFDP? If they can't, then you should explain in your commit message 
why that is so.

I would suspect they can be, so perhaps you should try using your flash 
with just PARSE_SFDP and see if it works.

>  	{ "mx66u2g45g",	 INFO(0xc2253c, 0, 64 * 1024, 4096)
>  		NO_SFDP_FLAGS(SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ)
>  		FIXUP_FLAGS(SPI_NOR_4B_OPCODES) },
> -- 
> 2.25.1
> 

-- 
Regards,
Pratyush Yadav