Re: [PATCH 15/21] mtd: spinand: winbond: Rename DTR variants

[Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@linaro.org>]

On 4/3/25 9:53 AM, Miquel Raynal wrote:
> Hello Tudor,
> 

Hi, Miquel!

> On 03/04/2025 at 07:19:15 +01, Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@linaro.org> wrote:
> 
>> On 4/2/25 5:57 PM, Miquel Raynal wrote:
>>> Hello Tudor,
>>>
>>> First, thanks a lot for the time spent reviewing, much appreciated.
>>>
>>> On 02/04/2025 at 16:19:00 +01, Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi, Miquel,
>>>>
>>>> On 3/7/25 3:08 PM, Miquel Raynal wrote:
>>>>> -static SPINAND_OP_VARIANTS(read_cache_dtr_variants,
>>>>> +static SPINAND_OP_VARIANTS(read_cache_dual_quad_dtr_variants,
>>>>
>>>> why not read_cache_single_dual_quad_dtr_variants? I see single dtr too
>>>> in the supported ops.
>>>
>>> That's true, but single modes are literally always supported, so it is
>>
>> literally, meaning from experience I guess, or is it mandatory that
>> dual, quad or octal dtr to imply single dtr as well? That's fine either
>> way, just curious.
> 
> Yes, I do not know any chip not supporting single SDR mode, just because
> we need a common ground to perform the discovery? The core would anyway
> not be ready for such chips if they were about to come.

okay

> 
>> Does quad dtr imply dual dtr? And octal dtr imply quad dtr and dual dtr?
>> If so, then maybe name it by the maximum IO dtr supported.
> 
> Unfortunately not. Chips supporting quad may also support dual, but not
> always. These chips flagged 'dual_quad' indeed support both. However in
> this particular case, octal chips do not support dual or quad
> opcodes. Hence my idea to name the variants about what is supported,
> behind 1S opcodes.

sounds good. It's common in SPI NOR too to have octal/single dtr but no
dual or quad dtr.

> 
>> btw, not strictly related to this patch, but for the overall
>> architecture picture, why do the SPI NAND flashes need to define their
>> supported ops? SPI NORs for example are capable of discovering their
>> supported ops by parsing at runtime some SFDP tables that describe most
>> of the flash parameters and setting. I see SFDP standard (jesd216g)
>> mentions SPI NAND devices as well. Have you or anybody else played with
>> SPI NANDs SFDP?
> 
> Not at all! SPI NANDs commonly advertise a parameter page which is way
> more succinct, but no SFDP table.

okay, the ONFI table I guess.

Cheers,
ta