sf: Fix entries for S25FL256S_256K and S25FL512S_256K

PATCH New Marek Vasut 2 participants 5 messages Jan 15, 2014 – Jan 16, 2014 Memory technology devices (MTD)

Share & tools

Marek Vasut

author

2014-01-15 14:29 UTC #0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 sf: Fix entries for S25FL256S_256K and S25FL512S_256K

Both of these chips have 256kB big sectors, thus the _256K suffix, compared to their _64K counterparts, which have 64kB sectors. Also, they have four times less sectors than their _64K counterparts.

Signed-off-by Marek Vasut <[email protected]>

Cc Jagannadha Sutradharudu Teki <[email protected]>

---
 drivers/mtd/spi/sf_params.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Note: Would be nice if someone actually tested this fix as I go by the
datasheet and by the old code that _was_ in U-Boot before the rework.

drivers/mtd/spi/sf_params.c +2 -2

index daf8fe7..5f63023 100644
@@ -55,9 +55,9 @@ const struct spi_flash_params spi_flash_params_table[] = {
 	{"S25FL032P",	   0x010215, 0x4d00,    64 * 1024,    64, RD_FULL,		     WR_QPP},
 	{"S25FL064P",	   0x010216, 0x4d00,    64 * 1024,   128, RD_FULL,		     WR_QPP},
 	{"S25FL128S_64K",  0x012018, 0x4d01,    64 * 1024,   256, RD_FULL,		     WR_QPP},
-	{"S25FL256S_256K", 0x010219, 0x4d00,    64 * 1024,   512, RD_FULL,		     WR_QPP},
+	{"S25FL256S_256K", 0x010219, 0x4d00,   256 * 1024,   128, RD_FULL,		     WR_QPP},
 	{"S25FL256S_64K",  0x010219, 0x4d01,	64 * 1024,   512, RD_FULL,		     WR_QPP},
-	{"S25FL512S_256K", 0x010220, 0x4d00,    64 * 1024,  1024, RD_FULL,		     WR_QPP},
+	{"S25FL512S_256K", 0x010220, 0x4d00,   256 * 1024,   256, RD_FULL,		     WR_QPP},
 	{"S25FL512S_64K",  0x010220, 0x4d01,    64 * 1024,  1024, RD_FULL,		     WR_QPP},
 #endif
 #ifdef CONFIG_SPI_FLASH_STMICRO		/* STMICRO */

Signature · 1 line

1.8.5.2

Marek Vasut

author

2014-01-15 14:36 UTC #1 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 sf: Fix entries for S25FL256S_256K and S25FL512S_256K

Quoted 4 lines · Marek Vasut

Both of these chips have 256kB big sectors, thus the _256K suffix, compared to their _64K counterparts, which have 64kB sectors. Also, they have four times less sectors than their _64K counterparts.

Quoted 8 lines

Signed-off-by Marek Vasut <[email protected]>
Cc Jagannadha Sutradharudu Teki <[email protected]>
---
 drivers/mtd/spi/sf_params.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Note: Would be nice if someone actually tested this fix as I go by the
datasheet and by the old code that _was_ in U-Boot before the rework.

btw. would be nice to get this one into current release to prevent it being broken. But I would _really_ appreciate some real-hardware testing here.

Quoted 9 lines

drivers/mtd/spi/sf_params.c +0 -0

index daf8fe7..5f63023 100644
@@ -55,9 +55,9 @@ const struct spi_flash_params spi_flash_params_table[] =
 { {"S25FL032P",	   0x010215, 0x4d00,    64 * 1024,    64, RD_FULL,	
 
 WR_QPP}, {"S25FL064P",	   0x010216, 0x4d00,    64 * 1024,   128,

RD_FULL, WR_QPP}, {"S25FL128S_64K", 0x012018, 0x4d01, 64

* 1024,

Quoted 1 line

256, RD_FULL, WR_QPP}, - {"S25FL256S_256K", 0x010219,

0x4d00,

Quoted 1 line

64 * 1024, 512, RD_FULL, WR_QPP}, + {"S25FL256S_256K",

0x010219,

Quoted 6 lines

0x4d00, 256 * 1024, 128, RD_FULL, WR_QPP}, {"S25FL256S_64K",
0x010219, 0x4d01, 64 * 1024, 512, RD_FULL, WR_QPP},
drivers/mtd/spi/sf_params.c +0 -1
-	{"S25FL512S_256K", 0x010220, 0x4d00,    64 * 1024,  1024, RD_FULL,	
WR_QPP}, + {"S25FL512S_256K", 0x010220, 0x4d00, 256 * 1024, 256,
RD_FULL, WR_QPP}, {"S25FL512S_64K", 0x010220, 0x4d01, 64

* 1024,

Quoted 2 lines

1024, RD_FULL, WR_QPP}, #endif
#ifdef CONFIG_SPI_FLASH_STMICRO /* STMICRO */

Best regards,
Marek Vasut

Jagan Teki

2014-01-15 15:17 UTC #2 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 sf: Fix entries for S25FL256S_256K and S25FL512S_256K

Quoted 11 lines · Marek Vasut

Quoted 10 lines · Marek Vasut
Both of these chips have 256kB big sectors, thus the _256K suffix, compared to their _64K counterparts, which have 64kB sectors. Also, they have four times less sectors than their _64K counterparts.
Signed-off-by Marek Vasut <[email protected]>
Cc Jagannadha Sutradharudu Teki <[email protected]>
---
 drivers/mtd/spi/sf_params.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 2 lines
Note: Would be nice if someone actually tested this fix as I go by the
datasheet and by the old code that _was_ in U-Boot before the rework.
btw. would be nice to get this one into current release to prevent it being broken. But I would _really_ appreciate some real-hardware testing here.

Yes - I'll try it and let us know.

Quoted 24 lines

Quoted 10 lines
drivers/mtd/spi/sf_params.c +0 -0
index daf8fe7..5f63023 100644
@@ -55,9 +55,9 @@ const struct spi_flash_params spi_flash_params_table[] =
 { {"S25FL032P",          0x010215, 0x4d00,    64 * 1024,    64, RD_FULL,
 
 WR_QPP}, {"S25FL064P",           0x010216, 0x4d00,    64 * 1024,   128,
RD_FULL, WR_QPP}, {"S25FL128S_64K", 0x012018, 0x4d01, 64
* 1024,
Quoted 1 line
256, RD_FULL, WR_QPP}, - {"S25FL256S_256K", 0x010219,
0x4d00,
Quoted 1 line
64 * 1024, 512, RD_FULL, WR_QPP}, + {"S25FL256S_256K",
0x010219,
Quoted 6 lines
0x4d00, 256 * 1024, 128, RD_FULL, WR_QPP}, {"S25FL256S_64K",
0x010219, 0x4d01, 64 * 1024, 512, RD_FULL, WR_QPP},
- {"S25FL512S_256K", 0x010220, 0x4d00, 64 * 1024, 1024, RD_FULL,
WR_QPP}, + {"S25FL512S_256K", 0x010220, 0x4d00, 256 * 1024, 256,
RD_FULL, WR_QPP}, {"S25FL512S_64K", 0x010220, 0x4d01, 64
* 1024,
Quoted 2 lines
1024, RD_FULL, WR_QPP}, #endif
#ifdef CONFIG_SPI_FLASH_STMICRO /* STMICRO */

Signature · 2 lines

Thanks,
Jagan.

Marek Vasut

author

2014-01-15 15:41 UTC #3 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 sf: Fix entries for S25FL256S_256K and S25FL512S_256K

Quoted 15 lines · Jagan Teki

Quoted 14 lines · Marek Vasut
Quoted 13 lines · Marek Vasut
Both of these chips have 256kB big sectors, thus the _256K suffix, compared to their _64K counterparts, which have 64kB sectors. Also, they have four times less sectors than their _64K counterparts.
Signed-off-by Marek Vasut <[email protected]>
Cc Jagannadha Sutradharudu Teki <[email protected]>
---
 drivers/mtd/spi/sf_params.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Note: Would be nice if someone actually tested this fix as I go by the

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 2 lines
datasheet and by the old code that _was_ in U-Boot before the rework.
btw. would be nice to get this one into current release to prevent it being broken. But I would _really_ appreciate some real-hardware testing here.
Yes - I'll try it and let us know.

Thanks!

Best regards,
Marek Vasut

Jagan Teki

2014-01-16 14:54 UTC #4 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 sf: Fix entries for S25FL256S_256K and S25FL512S_256K

Quoted 19 lines · Marek Vasut

Quoted 18 lines · Jagan Teki
Quoted 17 lines · Marek Vasut
Quoted 15 lines · Marek Vasut
Both of these chips have 256kB big sectors, thus the _256K suffix, compared to their _64K counterparts, which have 64kB sectors. Also, they have four times less sectors than their _64K counterparts.
Signed-off-by Marek Vasut <[email protected]>
Cc Jagannadha Sutradharudu Teki <[email protected]>
---
 drivers/mtd/spi/sf_params.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Note: Would be nice if someone actually tested this fix as I go by the
datasheet and by the old code that _was_ in U-Boot before the rework.

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 3 lines
btw. would be nice to get this one into current release to prevent it being broken. But I would _really_ appreciate some real-hardware testing here.
Yes - I'll try it and let us know.
Thanks!

Tested on S25FL256S_256K, works fine!

Signature · 2 lines

Thanks,
Jagan.