Hi,
ansuelsmth@gmail.com wrote on Wed, 27 Mar 2024 16:20:58 +0100:
On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 12:55:12PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 11:30:47AM +0100, Christian Marangi wrote:
misc_cmd_type in exec_op have multiple problems. With commit a82990c8a409 ("mtd: rawnand: qcom: Add read/read_start ops in exec_op path") it was reworked and generalized but actually broke the handling of the ERASE_BLOCK command.
Additional logic was added to the erase command cycle without clear explaination causing the erase command to be broken on testing it on a ipq806x nandc.
Fix the erase command by reverting the additional logic and only adding the NAND_DEV0_CFG0 additional call (required for erase command).
Fixes: a82990c8a409 ("mtd: rawnand: qcom: Add read/read_start ops in exec_op path") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Christian Marangi ansuelsmth@gmail.com
Changes v2:
- Split this and rework commit description and title
drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c | 5 ++--- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c index b079605c84d3..19d76e345a49 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c @@ -2830,9 +2830,8 @@ static int qcom_misc_cmd_type_exec(struct nand_chip *chip, const struct nand_sub nandc_set_reg(chip, NAND_EXEC_CMD, 1); write_reg_dma(nandc, NAND_FLASH_CMD, instrs, NAND_BAM_NEXT_SGL);
- (q_op.cmd_reg == OP_BLOCK_ERASE) ? write_reg_dma(nandc, NAND_DEV0_CFG0,
- 2, NAND_BAM_NEXT_SGL) : read_reg_dma(nandc,
- NAND_FLASH_STATUS, 1, NAND_BAM_NEXT_SGL);
- if (q_op.cmd_reg == OP_BLOCK_ERASE)
write_reg_dma(nandc, NAND_DEV0_CFG0, 2, NAND_BAM_NEXT_SGL);So this only avoids the call to, 'read_reg_dma(nandc, NAND_FLASH_STATUS, 1, NAND_BAM_NEXT_SGL)' if q_op.cmd_reg != OP_BLOCK_ERASE. But for q_op.cmd_reg == OP_BLOCK_ERASE, the result is the same.
I'm wondering how it results in fixing the OP_BLOCK_ERASE command.
Can you share the actual issue that you are seeing? Like error logs etc...
Issue is that nandc goes to ADM timeout as soon as a BLOCK_ERASE is called. BLOCK_ERASE operation match also another operation from MTD read. (parser also maps to other stuff)
I will be away from the testing board for 7-10 days so I can't provide logs currently.
So, shall we wait for additional logs from Christian or shall I merge the two-patches series? I'm not sure what's the status anymore.
Thanks, Miquèl