From: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>
To: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
Cc: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>,
linux-sunxi@googlegroups.com,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] mtd: nand: sunxi: fix OOB handling in ->write_xxx() functions
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 10:02:04 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150914170204.GL11487@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1442220063-7520-1-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 10:41:03AM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> The USER_DATA register cannot be accessed using byte accessors on A13
> SoCs, thus triggering a bug when using memcpy_toio on this register.
> Declare an helper macros to convert an OOB buffer into a suitable
> USER_DATA value and vice-versa.
>
> This patch also fixes an error in the oob_required logic (some OOB data
> are not written even if the user required it) by removing the
> oob_required condition, which is perfectly valid since the core already
> fill ->oob_poi with FFs when oob_required is false.
>
> Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.19+
> Fixes: 1fef62c1423b ("mtd: nand: add sunxi NAND flash controller support")
>
> ---
> Changes since v3:
> - drop the NFC_USER_DATA_TO_BUF() macro
I don't have any real objections to this version, and I think some IRC
discussion helped clear up a few questions. I'll take this for 4.3 soon,
unless I see any objections.
> Changes since v2:
> - add the NFC_USER_DATA_TO_BUF() macro and rename NFC_USER_DATA() into
> NFC_BUF_TO_USER_DATA()
> - rework the commit message
>
> Changes since v1:
> - drop the !oob_required conditional path
> - replace endianness conversions by a macro relying on byte shifting
> operations
> ---
> drivers/mtd/nand/sunxi_nand.c | 26 +++++++++-----------------
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/sunxi_nand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/sunxi_nand.c
> index f97a58d..279cafd 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/sunxi_nand.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/sunxi_nand.c
> @@ -147,6 +147,10 @@
> #define NFC_ECC_MODE GENMASK(15, 12)
> #define NFC_RANDOM_SEED GENMASK(30, 16)
>
> +/* NFC_USER_DATA helper macros */
> +#define NFC_BUF_TO_USER_DATA(buf) ((buf)[0] | ((buf)[1] << 8) | \
> + ((buf)[2] << 16) | ((buf)[3] << 24))
> +
> #define NFC_DEFAULT_TIMEOUT_MS 1000
>
> #define NFC_SRAM_SIZE 1024
> @@ -646,15 +650,9 @@ static int sunxi_nfc_hw_ecc_write_page(struct mtd_info *mtd,
> offset = layout->eccpos[i * ecc->bytes] - 4 + mtd->writesize;
>
> /* Fill OOB data in */
> - if (oob_required) {
> - tmp = 0xffffffff;
> - memcpy_toio(nfc->regs + NFC_REG_USER_DATA_BASE, &tmp,
> - 4);
> - } else {
> - memcpy_toio(nfc->regs + NFC_REG_USER_DATA_BASE,
> - chip->oob_poi + offset - mtd->writesize,
> - 4);
> - }
> + writel(NFC_BUF_TO_USER_DATA(chip->oob_poi +
> + layout->oobfree[i].offset),
> + nfc->regs + NFC_REG_USER_DATA_BASE);
I believe the few remaining questionable points were:
* you don't actually need to add the barrier, thus __raw_writel() would
suffice
* you're still doing a double swap for the (likely theoretical) big
endian case
Neither point matters much to me, so as noted above, LGTM.
>
> chip->cmdfunc(mtd, NAND_CMD_RNDIN, offset, -1);
>
> @@ -784,14 +782,8 @@ static int sunxi_nfc_hw_syndrome_ecc_write_page(struct mtd_info *mtd,
> offset += ecc->size;
>
> /* Fill OOB data in */
> - if (oob_required) {
> - tmp = 0xffffffff;
> - memcpy_toio(nfc->regs + NFC_REG_USER_DATA_BASE, &tmp,
> - 4);
> - } else {
> - memcpy_toio(nfc->regs + NFC_REG_USER_DATA_BASE, oob,
> - 4);
> - }
> + writel(NFC_BUF_TO_USER_DATA(oob),
> + nfc->regs + NFC_REG_USER_DATA_BASE);
Same here.
>
> tmp = NFC_DATA_TRANS | NFC_DATA_SWAP_METHOD | NFC_ACCESS_DIR |
> (1 << 30);
Brian
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: computersforpeace@gmail.com (Brian Norris)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v4] mtd: nand: sunxi: fix OOB handling in ->write_xxx() functions
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 10:02:04 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150914170204.GL11487@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1442220063-7520-1-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 10:41:03AM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> The USER_DATA register cannot be accessed using byte accessors on A13
> SoCs, thus triggering a bug when using memcpy_toio on this register.
> Declare an helper macros to convert an OOB buffer into a suitable
> USER_DATA value and vice-versa.
>
> This patch also fixes an error in the oob_required logic (some OOB data
> are not written even if the user required it) by removing the
> oob_required condition, which is perfectly valid since the core already
> fill ->oob_poi with FFs when oob_required is false.
>
> Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.19+
> Fixes: 1fef62c1423b ("mtd: nand: add sunxi NAND flash controller support")
>
> ---
> Changes since v3:
> - drop the NFC_USER_DATA_TO_BUF() macro
I don't have any real objections to this version, and I think some IRC
discussion helped clear up a few questions. I'll take this for 4.3 soon,
unless I see any objections.
> Changes since v2:
> - add the NFC_USER_DATA_TO_BUF() macro and rename NFC_USER_DATA() into
> NFC_BUF_TO_USER_DATA()
> - rework the commit message
>
> Changes since v1:
> - drop the !oob_required conditional path
> - replace endianness conversions by a macro relying on byte shifting
> operations
> ---
> drivers/mtd/nand/sunxi_nand.c | 26 +++++++++-----------------
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/sunxi_nand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/sunxi_nand.c
> index f97a58d..279cafd 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/sunxi_nand.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/sunxi_nand.c
> @@ -147,6 +147,10 @@
> #define NFC_ECC_MODE GENMASK(15, 12)
> #define NFC_RANDOM_SEED GENMASK(30, 16)
>
> +/* NFC_USER_DATA helper macros */
> +#define NFC_BUF_TO_USER_DATA(buf) ((buf)[0] | ((buf)[1] << 8) | \
> + ((buf)[2] << 16) | ((buf)[3] << 24))
> +
> #define NFC_DEFAULT_TIMEOUT_MS 1000
>
> #define NFC_SRAM_SIZE 1024
> @@ -646,15 +650,9 @@ static int sunxi_nfc_hw_ecc_write_page(struct mtd_info *mtd,
> offset = layout->eccpos[i * ecc->bytes] - 4 + mtd->writesize;
>
> /* Fill OOB data in */
> - if (oob_required) {
> - tmp = 0xffffffff;
> - memcpy_toio(nfc->regs + NFC_REG_USER_DATA_BASE, &tmp,
> - 4);
> - } else {
> - memcpy_toio(nfc->regs + NFC_REG_USER_DATA_BASE,
> - chip->oob_poi + offset - mtd->writesize,
> - 4);
> - }
> + writel(NFC_BUF_TO_USER_DATA(chip->oob_poi +
> + layout->oobfree[i].offset),
> + nfc->regs + NFC_REG_USER_DATA_BASE);
I believe the few remaining questionable points were:
* you don't actually need to add the barrier, thus __raw_writel() would
suffice
* you're still doing a double swap for the (likely theoretical) big
endian case
Neither point matters much to me, so as noted above, LGTM.
>
> chip->cmdfunc(mtd, NAND_CMD_RNDIN, offset, -1);
>
> @@ -784,14 +782,8 @@ static int sunxi_nfc_hw_syndrome_ecc_write_page(struct mtd_info *mtd,
> offset += ecc->size;
>
> /* Fill OOB data in */
> - if (oob_required) {
> - tmp = 0xffffffff;
> - memcpy_toio(nfc->regs + NFC_REG_USER_DATA_BASE, &tmp,
> - 4);
> - } else {
> - memcpy_toio(nfc->regs + NFC_REG_USER_DATA_BASE, oob,
> - 4);
> - }
> + writel(NFC_BUF_TO_USER_DATA(oob),
> + nfc->regs + NFC_REG_USER_DATA_BASE);
Same here.
>
> tmp = NFC_DATA_TRANS | NFC_DATA_SWAP_METHOD | NFC_ACCESS_DIR |
> (1 << 30);
Brian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-14 17:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-14 8:41 [PATCH v4] mtd: nand: sunxi: fix OOB handling in ->write_xxx() functions Boris Brezillon
2015-09-14 8:41 ` Boris Brezillon
2015-09-14 8:59 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-09-14 8:59 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-09-14 9:41 ` Boris Brezillon
2015-09-14 9:41 ` Boris Brezillon
2015-09-14 11:49 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-09-14 11:49 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-09-14 12:36 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-09-14 12:36 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-09-14 17:02 ` Brian Norris [this message]
2015-09-14 17:02 ` Brian Norris
2015-09-21 20:43 ` Brian Norris
2015-09-21 20:43 ` Brian Norris
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150914170204.GL11487@google.com \
--to=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
--cc=boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-sunxi@googlegroups.com \
--cc=maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.