On 31.05.23 14:58, Dario Binacchi wrote: > Hi Frieder, All > > On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 12:58 PM Frieder Schrempf > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On 17.05.23 09:43, Frieder Schrempf wrote: >>> Hi Michael, hi Dario, >>> >>> On 15.05.23 23:33, Michael Nazzareno Trimarchi wrote: >>>> Hi >>>> >>>> Il lun 15 mag 2023, 23:12 Tom Rini <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> ha scritto: >>>> >>>> On Tue, May 09, 2023 at 09:09:28AM +0200, Frieder Schrempf wrote: >>>> > Hi Michael, hi Dario, >>>> > >>>> > On 18.04.23 15:46, Frieder Schrempf wrote: >>>> > > Hi Michael, Dario, >>>> > > >>>> > > On 28.03.23 09:57, Frieder Schrempf wrote: >>>> > >> Hi Michael, >>>> > >> >>>> > >> On 10.02.23 12:57, Michael Nazzareno Trimarchi wrote: >>>> > >>> Hi >>>> > >>> >>>> > >>> I will review >>>> > >>> >>>> > >>> On Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 5:52 PM Tom Rini <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Feb 09, 2023 at 10:24:47AM +0100, Frieder Schrempf >>>> wrote: >>>> > >>>>> Hi, >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> On 10.01.23 12:58, Frieder Schrempf wrote: >>>> > >>>>>> From: Mikhail Kshevetskiy <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> Currently there are 3 different variants of read_id >>>> implementation: >>>> > >>>>>> 1. opcode only. Found in GD5FxGQ4xF. >>>> > >>>>>> 2. opcode + 1 addr byte. Found in GD5GxGQ4xA/E >>>> > >>>>>> 3. opcode + 1 dummy byte. Found in other currently >>>> supported chips. >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> Original implementation was for variant 1 and let detect >>>> function >>>> > >>>>>> of chips with variant 2 and 3 to ignore the first byte. >>>> This isn't >>>> > >>>>>> robust: >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> 1. For chips of variant 2, if SPI master doesn't keep MOSI low >>>> > >>>>>> during read, chip will get a random id offset, and the >>>> entire id >>>> > >>>>>> buffer will shift by that offset, causing detect failure. >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> 2. For chips of variant 1, if it happens to get a devid >>>> that equals >>>> > >>>>>> to manufacture id of variant 2 or 3 chips, it'll get >>>> incorrectly >>>> > >>>>>> detected. >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> This patch reworks detect procedure to address problems >>>> above. New >>>> > >>>>>> logic do detection for all variants separatedly, in 1-2-3 >>>> order. >>>> > >>>>>> Since all current detect methods do exactly the same id >>>> matching >>>> > >>>>>> procedure, unify them into core.c and remove detect method >>>> from >>>> > >>>>>> manufacture_ops. >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> This is a rework of Chuanhong Guo <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> patch >>>> > >>>>>> submitted to linux kernel >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Mikhail Kshevetskiy >>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>>> > >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Frieder Schrempf >>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> +Cc: Jagan, Tom >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> Who is supposed to pick up these patches? Some of them have >>>> been around >>>> > >>>>> for some months (before I resent them). >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> There is no maintainer for drivers/mtd/spinand/ and no >>>> maintainer for >>>> > >>>>> drivers/mtd/ in general. >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> In Patchwork Jagan got assigned, but the get_maintainer.pl >>>> <http://get_maintainer.pl/> script didn't >>>> > >>>>> even add him to Cc, of course. >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> Any ideas how to proceed? >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> We don't have anyone dedicated to that area, yes, sadly. I've >>>> added >>>> > >>>> Michael and Dario as they've also been doing mtd-but-not-spi >>>> work of >>>> > >>>> late to see if they're interested. Or since you've long been >>>> working >>>> > >>>> here, would you like to more formally maintain the area? Thanks! >>>> > >>> >>>> > >>> They can come from our tree. I will try to sort out all my >>>> duties weeked >>>> > >> >>>> > >> Any news regarding reviewing/picking these patches? >>>> > > >>>> > > Ping! >>>> > > >>>> > > Can you please apply these patches, that have been waiting for >>>> so long? >>>> > >>>> > I still can't see this applied anywhere. You already told me to take >>>> > care of it multiple times. Can you please get it done? >>>> >>>> Yes, I'd really like to see a PR at least vs -next at this point so >>>> things aren't lost, thanks! >>>> >>>> >>>> I think that we pick already it so it will happen. >>> >>> I can see patch 1/5 of this series in the nand-next tree. What about the >>> other four patches of this series? Please pick them up, too! >> >> Ping, again! I will just keep on doing this and hope at some point you >> will pick up the patches. > > Applied to nand-next.
Thanks a lot, Dario!
