From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 805BDC43461 for ; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 07:50:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F03321D1B for ; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 07:50:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="GVQTZFD+" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726161AbgIOHt6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Sep 2020 03:49:58 -0400 Received: from fllv0015.ext.ti.com ([198.47.19.141]:41654 "EHLO fllv0015.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726273AbgIOHs2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Sep 2020 03:48:28 -0400 Received: from lelv0265.itg.ti.com ([10.180.67.224]) by fllv0015.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 08F7lVYV073494; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 02:47:31 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1600156051; bh=F1VtgPYhfoDI8XLXkh3ytrJ6AvV5dM/S6p5vJyP8ges=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=GVQTZFD+BngUoXYojAYu820J17/dT+ELcF3Bj0dk45hEKIePkQCuUdVeWFEWmaKuC P2zUpcLGJf9ZLfNbJ7vVy2ByHVVwnVbSdkLWUMb4JTYePnx2YppQiHQN9NZHrGde+/ 4M1KTriHvr7l5RwcjWIbHkaDavB1SZpgTNMFJVdk= Received: from DFLE113.ent.ti.com (dfle113.ent.ti.com [10.64.6.34]) by lelv0265.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 08F7lV0H096544 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 15 Sep 2020 02:47:31 -0500 Received: from DFLE115.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.36) by DFLE113.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.34) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1979.3; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 02:47:30 -0500 Received: from fllv0040.itg.ti.com (10.64.41.20) by DFLE115.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.36) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1979.3 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 02:47:30 -0500 Received: from localhost (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by fllv0040.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 08F7lTcF019578; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 02:47:30 -0500 Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2020 13:17:29 +0530 From: Pratyush Yadav To: Vignesh Raghavendra CC: Tudor Ambarus , Miquel Raynal , Richard Weinberger , "open list:SPI NOR SUBSYSTEM" , open list , Sekhar Nori , Boris Brezillon Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 00/14] mtd: spi-nor: add xSPI Octal DTR support Message-ID: <20200915074727.o4drgfgdabhozjb5@ti.com> References: <20200903171313.18741-1-p.yadav@ti.com> <973eac67-fa01-309f-c4d1-7983f404d507@ti.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <973eac67-fa01-309f-c4d1-7983f404d507@ti.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20171215 X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 15/09/20 12:16PM, Vignesh Raghavendra wrote: > > > On 9/3/20 10:42 PM, Pratyush Yadav wrote: > > Hi, > > > > This series adds support for Octal DTR flashes in the SPI NOR framework, > > and then adds hooks for the Cypress Semper and Micron Xcella flashes to > > allow running them in Octal DTR mode. This series assumes that the flash > > is handed to the kernel in Legacy SPI mode. > > > > Tested on TI J721E EVM with 1-bit ECC on the Cypress flash. > > > [...] > > Please fix checkpatch issues on patch 1, 3, 4 and 5 I ran checkpatch on my patches based on top of next-20200914 just now. I only see issues with patches 3 and 4. Patches 1 and 5 report no issues. What problems do you see on patches 1 and 5? As for patches 3 and 4, the error I see is "ENOTSUPP is not a SUSV4 error code, prefer EOPNOTSUPP". I left it in intentionally. There a couple other functions in SPI NOR that use ENOTSUPP instead of EOPNOTSUPP so I followed the local convention. If you insist, I can add a preparatory patch that first changes those uses of ENOTSUPP to EOPNOTSUPP and then update patches 3 and 4 to do the same. Let me know. > Otherwise patches look good to me... Thanks. -- Regards, Pratyush Yadav Texas Instruments India