Re: [PATCH] mtd: spi-nor: winbond: add support for W25Q512NW-IQ/IN

[Jae Hyun Yoo <quic_jaehyoo@quicinc.com>]

Hi,

On 7/15/2022 3:52 PM, Michael Walle wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Am 2022-07-15 22:15, schrieb Jae Hyun Yoo:
>> On 7/14/2022 7:30 AM, Jae Hyun Yoo wrote:
>>> On 7/14/2022 7:21 AM, Michael Walle wrote:
>>>> Am 2022-07-14 16:16, schrieb Michael Walle:
>>>>> Am 2022-07-14 15:47, schrieb Jae Hyun Yoo:
>>>>>> On 7/14/2022 12:41 AM, Michael Walle wrote:
>>>>>>> What does "doesn't boot at all" mean? Are there any kernel startup
>>>>>>> messages?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm sharing the error messages below.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>>> [    0.748594] spi-nor spi0.0: w25q512nwq (65536 Kbytes)
>>>>>> [    0.865216] spi-aspeed-smc 1e620000.spi: CE0 read buswidth:4 
>>>>>> [0x406c0741]
>>>>>> [    0.872833] ------------[ cut here ]------------
>>>>>> [    0.877984] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 1 at drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c:583
>>>>>> add_mtd_device+0x28c/0x53c
>>>>>> [    0.887237] CPU: 1 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted
>>>>>> 5.15.43-AUTOINC-dirty-23801a6 #1
>>>>>
>>>>> Could you please try it on the latest (vanilla) linux-next?
>>>>
>>>> or spi-nor/next [1] as there are quite a lot of changes. The
>>>> patches shall be based on that.
>>>
>>> Okay. Let me try that. I tested it using 5.15.43 with back-ported
>>> spi-nor patches from the latest. I'll back-port more changes from
>>> the spi-nor/next and will test the INFO(0xef6020, 0, 0, 0) setting
>>> again.
>>
>> I tested the setting again after cherry picking all SPI relating changes
>> from the 'for-next' branch of
>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/spi repository.
> 
> That is not the tree I mentioned in my previous mail. Why do you
> cherry-pick the changes instead of just trying the spi-nor/next
> tree?

I compared it with 
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mtd/linux.git#spi-nor/next 
too. Result is still the same.

>> No luck! It's still making the same warning dump at 'add_mtd_device'
>> since 'mtd->erasesize' is checked as 0.
>>
>> I traced it further to check if the erasesize is properly parsed from
>> the sfdp and checked that erase map seems parsed and initialized
>> correctly in 'spi_nor_parse_bfpt' but problem is, a target
>> mtd->erasesize is not properly selected in 'spi_nor_select_erase' since
>> the 'wanted_size' variable is initialized as sector size of info table
>> so a selected target mtd->erasesize is also 0 so looks like it's the
>> reason why it can't initialize mtd device if we use
>> INFO(0xef6020, 0, 0, 0).
> 
> Have a look at
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mtd/20220510140232.3519184-2-michael@walle.cc/ 
> 
> wanted_size can be 0. In this case spi_nor_select_uniform_erase()
> should return the biggest valid erase type. Could you please check that
> (1) spi_nor_select_uniform_erase() return non-NULL
> (2) check what value erase->size has (I guess it should be 64k in your 
> case)
> 
>  From what you tell me erase->size should be zero. If that is the
> case look at spi_nor_parse_bfpt() where the erase sizes are parsed.
> Also take a look at spi_nor_parse_4bait() where the erase types might
> be cleared again.
> 
> I've checked your SFDP data and it contains three valid erase sizes
> and opcodes for 3byte addressing and two valid erase opcodes for 4
> byte addressing. So that looks all good. After all the SFDP parsing
> I expect that you have two valid erase types:
>   - erase size 4096 with erase opcode 21h
>   - erase size 65536 with erase opcode DCh

I checked SFDP is parsed and these three erase sizes are enumerated
in the for loop in spi_nor_select_uniform_erase().

65536
0
4096

>> Also, checked that the mtd->erasesize is set to 4096 if I enable
>> CONFIG_MTD_SPI_NOR_USE_4K_SECTORS so the SPI flash can be initialized
>> with the INFO(0xef6020, 0, 0, 0) setting but, it should cover even
>> when
>> the configuration is not enabled. I think, this patch should go as it
>> is. The erasesize selecting issue could be fixed using a separate
>> patch.
>> Are you still sure that the INFO(0xef6020, 0, 0, 0) works in the
>> latest spi-next?
> 
> I've got two tested-by's with two different flashes, so yes, I'm
> pretty sure it works in principle. It might still be something
> wrong with your flash though.

Yes, I read the thread you are upstreaming currently.
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220510140232.3519184-1-michael@walle.cc/

Were those tested in CONFIG_MTD_SPI_NOR_USE_4K_SECTORS enabled build?

As I said above, mine also works if I enable the config but we should
make it work without the config, right?

-Jae

> -michael