Hi, > -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Rini <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2024 8:47 PM > To: Abbarapu, Venkatesh <[email protected]> > Cc: Marek Vasut <[email protected]>; [email protected]; > [email protected]; [email protected]; Simek, Michal > <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; u- > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; git > (AMD-Xilinx) <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] mtd: spi-nor: Fix the spi_nor_read() when config > SPI_STACKED_PARALLEL is enabled > > On Thu, Dec 26, 2024 at 03:34:33AM +0000, Abbarapu, Venkatesh wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Marek Vasut <[email protected]> > > > Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2024 2:19 AM > > > To: Abbarapu, Venkatesh <[email protected]>; > > > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] > > > Cc: Simek, Michal <[email protected]>; > > > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > > > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > > > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > > > [email protected]; [email protected]; > > > [email protected]; git (AMD-Xilinx) <[email protected]> > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] mtd: spi-nor: Fix the spi_nor_read() when > > > config SPI_STACKED_PARALLEL is enabled > > > > > > On 12/24/24 4:37 PM, Venkatesh Yadav Abbarapu wrote: > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > @@ -1593,18 +1596,22 @@ static int spi_nor_read(struct mtd_info > > > > *mtd, loff_t > > > from, size_t len, > > > > } > > > > > > > > while (len) { > > > > - bank = (u32)from / SZ_16M; > > > > - if (nor->flags & SNOR_F_HAS_PARALLEL) > > > > - bank /= 2; > > > > + read_len = len; > > > > + offset = from; > > > > > > > > - rem_bank_len = SZ_16M * (bank + 1); > > > > - if (nor->flags & SNOR_F_HAS_PARALLEL) > > > > - rem_bank_len *= 2; > > > > - rem_bank_len -= from; > > > > + if (CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(SPI_FLASH_BAR)) { > > > > + bank = (u32)from / SZ_16M; > > > > + if (nor->flags & SNOR_F_HAS_PARALLEL) > > > > + bank /= 2; > > > Is this code which operates on (nor->flags & SNOR_F_HAS_PARALLEL) > > > really supposed to be enabled if (CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(SPI_FLASH_BAR)) > > > is SET or instead if STACKED_PARALLEL symbol is SET ? > > > > The FLASH_BAR and STACKED_PARALLEL configs are independent. They > won't depend on each other. > > At this point in the release cycle, I'd really rather see things as: > if (CONFIG_SPI_STACKED_PARALLEL) { > ... anything needed for the new support mode .. > } else { > ... the way it used to be ... > } > > And for v2025.04 we can move the codebase forward. But I'm worried at this > point > I'm going to have to revert all of the stacked stuff, which could get messy, > in order to > avoid regressions elsewhere.
I am updating the parallel/stacked code based on the config SPI_STACKED_PARALLEL and not touching the default code. Thanks Venkatesh > -- > Tom
