| Message ID | 20200925065418.1077472-1-ikjn@chromium.org |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | spi: spi-mtk-nor: Add mt8192 support | expand |
HI! One more comment: On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 2:55 PM Ikjoon Jang <ikjn@chromium.org> wrote: > +static bool mtk_nor_check_prg(const struct spi_mem_op *op) > +{ > + size_t len = op->cmd.nbytes + op->addr.nbytes + op->dummy.nbytes; > + > + if (len > MTK_NOR_PRG_MAX_SIZE) > + return false; > + > + if (!op->data.nbytes) > + return true; > + > + if (op->data.dir == SPI_MEM_DATA_OUT) > + return ((len + op->data.nbytes) <= MTK_NOR_PRG_MAX_SIZE); > + else if (op->data.dir == SPI_MEM_DATA_IN) > + return ((len + op->data.nbytes) <= MTK_NOR_PRG_MAX_CYCLES); You need to consider the existence of adjust_op_size in supports_op as well. This mtk_nor_check_prg still rejects SFDP reading command from spi-nor driver altogether.
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 3:47 PM Chuanhong Guo <gch981213@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi! > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 2:55 PM Ikjoon Jang <ikjn@chromium.org> wrote: > > > > When mtk-nor fallbacks to generic spi transfers, it can actually > > transfer up to 7 bytes. > > generic transfer_one_message should support full-duplex transfers, > not transfers with special format requirements. (e.g. here the last > byte is rx only.) These transfers with format requirements should > be implemented with spi-mem interface instead. yep, that's correct. > > > > > This patch fixes adjust_op_size() and supports_op() to explicitly > > check 7 bytes range and also fixes possible under/overflow conditions > > in register offsets calculation. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ikjoon Jang <ikjn@chromium.org> > > I was notified by Bayi about your discussion and sent some > patches yesterday for the same purpose. Whoops... > As transfer_one_message isn't the proper place to implement > this, maybe we could work on my version instead? > I didn't noticed that before, Sure, please go ahead, I'll follow up with your patch in v4. > > --- > > > > (no changes since v1) > > This should be "new patch" not "no changes" :P oops, it seems my script did something wrong. > > > > > > drivers/spi/spi-mtk-nor.c | 102 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- > > 1 file changed, 76 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-mtk-nor.c b/drivers/spi/spi-mtk-nor.c > > index 0f7d4ec68730..e7719d249095 100644 > > --- a/drivers/spi/spi-mtk-nor.c > > +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-mtk-nor.c > > @@ -79,7 +79,11 @@ > > #define MTK_NOR_REG_DMA_DADR 0x720 > > #define MTK_NOR_REG_DMA_END_DADR 0x724 > > > > +/* maximum bytes of TX in PRG mode */ > > #define MTK_NOR_PRG_MAX_SIZE 6 > > +/* maximum bytes of TX + RX is 7, last 1 byte is always being sent as zero */ > > +#define MTK_NOR_PRG_MAX_CYCLES 7 > > + > > // Reading DMA src/dst addresses have to be 16-byte aligned > > #define MTK_NOR_DMA_ALIGN 16 > > #define MTK_NOR_DMA_ALIGN_MASK (MTK_NOR_DMA_ALIGN - 1) > > @@ -167,6 +171,24 @@ static bool mtk_nor_match_read(const struct spi_mem_op *op) > > return false; > > } > > > > +static bool mtk_nor_check_prg(const struct spi_mem_op *op) > > +{ > > + size_t len = op->cmd.nbytes + op->addr.nbytes + op->dummy.nbytes; > > + > > + if (len > MTK_NOR_PRG_MAX_SIZE) > > + return false; > > + > > + if (!op->data.nbytes) > > + return true; > > + > > + if (op->data.dir == SPI_MEM_DATA_OUT) > > + return ((len + op->data.nbytes) <= MTK_NOR_PRG_MAX_SIZE); > > + else if (op->data.dir == SPI_MEM_DATA_IN) > > + return ((len + op->data.nbytes) <= MTK_NOR_PRG_MAX_CYCLES); > > + else > > + return true; > > +} > > + > > static int mtk_nor_adjust_op_size(struct spi_mem *mem, struct spi_mem_op *op) > > { > > size_t len; > > @@ -195,10 +217,22 @@ static int mtk_nor_adjust_op_size(struct spi_mem *mem, struct spi_mem_op *op) > > } > > } > > > > - len = MTK_NOR_PRG_MAX_SIZE - op->cmd.nbytes - op->addr.nbytes - > > - op->dummy.nbytes; > > - if (op->data.nbytes > len) > > - op->data.nbytes = len; > > + if (mtk_nor_check_prg(op)) > > + return 0; > > + > > + len = op->cmd.nbytes + op->addr.nbytes + op->dummy.nbytes; > > + > > + if (op->data.dir == SPI_MEM_DATA_OUT) { > > + if (len == MTK_NOR_PRG_MAX_SIZE) > > + return -EINVAL; > > + op->data.nbytes = min_t(unsigned int, op->data.nbytes, > > + MTK_NOR_PRG_MAX_SIZE - len); > > + } else { > > + if (len == MTK_NOR_PRG_MAX_CYCLES) > > + return -EINVAL; > > + op->data.nbytes = min_t(unsigned int, op->data.nbytes, > > + MTK_NOR_PRG_MAX_CYCLES - len); > > + } > > > > return 0; > > } > > @@ -206,8 +240,6 @@ static int mtk_nor_adjust_op_size(struct spi_mem *mem, struct spi_mem_op *op) > > static bool mtk_nor_supports_op(struct spi_mem *mem, > > const struct spi_mem_op *op) > > { > > - size_t len; > > - > > if (op->cmd.buswidth != 1) > > return false; > > > > @@ -223,12 +255,11 @@ static bool mtk_nor_supports_op(struct spi_mem *mem, > > (op->data.buswidth == 1); > > } > > > > - len = op->cmd.nbytes + op->addr.nbytes + op->dummy.nbytes; > > - if ((len > MTK_NOR_PRG_MAX_SIZE) || > > - ((op->data.nbytes) && (len == MTK_NOR_PRG_MAX_SIZE))) > > + /* fallback to generic spi xfer */ > > + if (op->cmd.buswidth > 1 || op->addr.buswidth > 1 || op->data.buswidth > 1) > > return false; > > Rejecting an op in supports_op doesn't tell it to fall back to generic > spi transfer. > It instead tells caller to abort this transfer completely. > A fallback only happens when exec_op returns -ENOTSUPP. yep but I think that case always going PRG mode in exec_op() with the same condition? > This comment is incorrect. I'd put this buswidth checking in mtk_nor_check_prg > instead because mtk_nor_check_prg is checking whether an op is supported > by prg mode, thus it should reject ops with buswidth > 1. > > > > > - return true; > > + return mtk_nor_check_prg(op); > > } > > > > static void mtk_nor_setup_bus(struct mtk_nor *sp, const struct spi_mem_op *op) > > @@ -459,22 +490,36 @@ static int mtk_nor_transfer_one_message(struct spi_controller *master, > > int stat = 0; > > int reg_offset = MTK_NOR_REG_PRGDATA_MAX; > > void __iomem *reg; > > - const u8 *txbuf; > > - u8 *rxbuf; > > - int i; > > + int i, tx_len = 0, rx_len = 0; > > > > list_for_each_entry(t, &m->transfers, transfer_list) { > > - txbuf = t->tx_buf; > > - for (i = 0; i < t->len; i++, reg_offset--) { > > + const u8 *txbuf = t->tx_buf; > > + > > + if (!txbuf) { > > + rx_len += t->len; > > + continue; > > + } > > + > > + if (rx_len) { > > + stat = -EPROTO; > > + goto msg_done; > > + } > > NACK. you are unnecessarily rejecting possible transfers. yep, ditto > > > + > > + for (i = 0; i < t->len && reg_offset >= 0; i++, reg_offset--) { > > reg = sp->base + MTK_NOR_REG_PRGDATA(reg_offset); > > - if (txbuf) > > - writeb(txbuf[i], reg); > > - else > > - writeb(0, reg); > > + writeb(txbuf[i], reg); > > + tx_len++; > > According to SPI standard, during a rx transfer, tx should be kept low. > These PROGDATA registers doesn't clear itself so it'll keep sending > data from last transfer, which violates this rule. That's > why the original code writes 0 to PRGDATA for rx bytes. following lines with while() will set 0s to the rest of registers. > > > } > > - trx_len += t->len; > > } > > > > + while (reg_offset >= 0) { > > + writeb(0, sp->base + MTK_NOR_REG_PRGDATA(reg_offset)); > > + reg_offset--; > > + } > > + > > + rx_len = min_t(unsigned long, MTK_NOR_PRG_MAX_CYCLES - tx_len, rx_len); > > + trx_len = tx_len + rx_len; > > + > > writel(trx_len * BITS_PER_BYTE, sp->base + MTK_NOR_REG_PRG_CNT); > > > > stat = mtk_nor_cmd_exec(sp, MTK_NOR_CMD_PROGRAM, > > @@ -482,13 +527,18 @@ static int mtk_nor_transfer_one_message(struct spi_controller *master, > > if (stat < 0) > > goto msg_done; > > > > - reg_offset = trx_len - 1; > > - list_for_each_entry(t, &m->transfers, transfer_list) { > > - rxbuf = t->rx_buf; > > - for (i = 0; i < t->len; i++, reg_offset--) { > > - reg = sp->base + MTK_NOR_REG_SHIFT(reg_offset); > > - if (rxbuf) > > + if (rx_len > 0) { > > + reg_offset = rx_len - 1; > > + list_for_each_entry(t, &m->transfers, transfer_list) { > > + u8 *rxbuf = t->rx_buf; > > + > > + if (!rxbuf) > > + continue; > > + > > + for (i = 0; i < t->len && reg_offset >= 0; i++, reg_offset--) { > > + reg = sp->base + MTK_NOR_REG_SHIFT(reg_offset); > > rxbuf[i] = readb(reg); > > + } > > I think this is replacing original code with some equivalent ones, which > seems unnecessary. This patch addressed the issue with 1+6 bytes transfer (e.g JEDEC ID) can have negative reg_offset. And there's skipping the loop if (rx_len < 0) anyway I'd like to follow with your new patch. :-) Thanks! > > > } > > } > > > -- > Regards, > Chuanhong Guo
This patchset adds 36bit dma address and power management supports for mt8192-nor. Changes in v3: - Fix a bugfix of v2 in checking spi memory operation. - split read_dma function into two (normal/bounce) - Support 7bytes generic spi xfer Changes in v2: - Add power management support - Fix bugs in checking spi memory operation. - use dma_alloc_coherent for allocating bounce buffer - code cleanups Ikjoon Jang (6): dt-bindings: spi: add mt8192-nor compatible string spi: spi-mtk-nor: fix mishandled logics in checking SPI memory operation spi: spi-mtk-nor: support 7 bytes transfer of generic spi spi: spi-mtk-nor: use dma_alloc_coherent() for bounce buffer spi: spi-mtk-nor: support 36bit dma addressing spi: spi-mtk-nor: Add power management support .../bindings/spi/mediatek,spi-mtk-nor.yaml | 1 + drivers/spi/spi-mtk-nor.c | 333 ++++++++++++------ 2 files changed, 230 insertions(+), 104 deletions(-)