Hi Il mer 20 set 2023, 08:13 Alexander Dahl <[email protected]> ha scritto:
> Hello Eugen, hello Michael, > > Am Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 01:59:58PM +0300 schrieb Eugen Hristev: > > On 8/23/23 09:54, Michael Nazzareno Trimarchi wrote: > > > Hi > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 8:28 AM Eugen Hristev > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > On 8/8/23 18:03, Alexander Dahl wrote: > > > > > Hello Michael, > > > > > > > > > > Am Tue, Aug 08, 2023 at 03:49:45PM +0200 schrieb Michael Nazzareno > Trimarchi: > > > > > > Hi > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 8, 2023 at 3:03 PM Alexander Dahl <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Adapt behaviour to Linux kernel driver. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The return value of gpio_request_by_name_nodev() was not > checked before, > > > > > > > and thus in case 'rb-gpios' was missing in DT, rb.type was set > to > > > > > > > ATMEL_NAND_GPIO_RB nevertheless, leading to output like this > for > > > > > > > example (on sam9x60-curiosity with the line removed from dts): > > > > > > > > > > > > > > NAND: Could not find valid ONFI parameter page; aborting > > > > > > > device found, Manufacturer ID: 0xc2, Chip ID: 0xdc > > > > > > > Macronix NAND 512MiB 3,3V 8-bit > > > > > > > 512 MiB, SLC, erase size: 256 KiB, page size: 4096, OOB > size: 64 > > > > > > > atmel-nand-controller nand-controller: NAND scan failed: > -22 > > > > > > > Failed to probe nand driver (err = -22) > > > > > > > Failed to initialize NAND controller. (error -22) > > > > > > > 0 MiB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Note: not having that gpio assigned in dts is fine, the driver > does not > > > > > > > override nand_chip->dev_ready() then and a generic solution is > used. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fixes: 6a8dfd57220d ("nand: atmel: Add DM based NAND driver") > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Alexander Dahl <[email protected]> > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/atmel/nand-controller.c | 11 > +++++++---- > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/atmel/nand-controller.c > b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/atmel/nand-controller.c > > > > > > > index 2b29c8def6..8e745a5111 100644 > > > > > > > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/atmel/nand-controller.c > > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/atmel/nand-controller.c > > > > > > > @@ -1600,10 +1600,13 @@ static struct atmel_nand > *atmel_nand_create(struct atmel_nand_controller *nc, > > > > > > > nand->cs[i].rb.type = > ATMEL_NAND_NATIVE_RB; > > > > > > > nand->cs[i].rb.id = val; > > > > > > > } else { > > > > > > > - gpio_request_by_name_nodev(np, > "rb-gpios", 0, > > > > > > > - > &nand->cs[i].rb.gpio, > > > > > > > - > GPIOD_IS_IN); > > > > > > > - nand->cs[i].rb.type = > ATMEL_NAND_GPIO_RB; > > > > > > > + ret = gpio_request_by_name_nodev(np, > "rb-gpios", 0, > > > > > > > + > &nand->cs[i].rb.gpio, > > > > > > > + > GPIOD_IS_IN); > > > > > > > + if (ret) > > > > > > > + dev_err(nc->dev, "Failed to > get R/B gpio (err = %d)\n", ret); > > > > > > > > > > > > Should not then an error here > > > > > > > > > > Different log level or no message at all? > > > > > > > > > > Note: Linux prints the same message with error level in that case. > > > > > > > > > > Greets > > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since the rb-gpios is optional, we can continue probing without it. > > > > Throwing an error message is optional and pure informative. So I am > fine > > > > with it > > > > > > > > > > Yes ok, but I'm not sure linux give an error if the gpio is get as > > > optional and condition > > > is IS_ERR. Am I right? > > > > > > if (IS_ERR(gpio) && PTR_ERR(gpio) != -ENOENT) { > > dev_err(nc->dev, > > "Failed to get R/B gpio (err = > %ld)\n", > > PTR_ERR(gpio)); > > return ERR_CAST(gpio); > > } > > > > So Linux throws the message if IS_ERR . If the property is missing > (ENOENT) > > it moves on. > > > > Can we replicate the same behavior or this behavior does not suit us in > > U-boot ? > > > > Basically I think it should be : > > > > if (ret && ret != -ENOENT) > > dev_err(...) > > if (!ret) > > rb.type = ATMEL_NAND_GPIO_RB; > > > > Is this what you had in mind Michael ? > > The discussion between you guys somehow got stuck. I still have this > patch on my TODO list, but I'm not sure how to proceed. Please advice > in which direction to go forward, there's still an error condition > (described in the initial commit message) here, which needs to be > handled, otherwise the NAND flash might not be usable. Yes the suggestion above is what is the right path to follow. Michael > > Greets > Alex > > > > > Eugen > > > > > > > > For the rest is fine > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > > What I wanted to ask is what happens with nand->cs[i].rb.type , is > it 0 > > > > by default ? > > > > > > > > Other than that, I can apply this patch, Michael, do you have any > more > > > > comments on it ? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Eugen > > > > > > > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > > > > > > > > + else > > > > > > > + nand->cs[i].rb.type = > ATMEL_NAND_GPIO_RB; > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > gpio_request_by_name_nodev(np, "cs-gpios", 0, > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > 2.30.2 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Michael Nazzareno Trimarchi > > > > > > Co-Founder & Chief Executive Officer > > > > > > M. +39 347 913 2170 > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > __________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > > > Amarula Solutions BV > > > > > > Joop Geesinkweg 125, 1114 AB, Amsterdam, NL > > > > > > T. +31 (0)85 111 9172 > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > www.amarulasolutions.com > > > > > > > > > > > > >
