Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2] sf: Macronix additional chips supported

On Friday 03 July 2009 13:28:01 Prafulla Wadaskar wrote:

new chips supported:- MX25L1605D, MX25L3205D, MX25L6405D, MX25L12855E out of which MX25L6405D and MX25L12855E tested on Kirkwood platforms

Modified the Macronix flash support to use 2 bytes of device id instead of 1 This was required to support MX25L12855E

Contributor: Piyush Shah spiyush@marvell.com

a contributor really should be a signed-off-by

--- a/drivers/mtd/spi/macronix.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi/macronix.c @@ -49,17 +49,21 @@ #define CMD_MX25XX_DP 0xb9 /* Deep Power-down */ #define CMD_MX25XX_RES 0xab /* Release from DP, and Read Signature */

-#define MXIC_ID_MX2516 0x15 -#define MXIC_ID_MX2520 0x12 -#define MXIC_ID_MX2532 0x16 -#define MXIC_ID_MX2540 0x13 -#define MXIC_ID_MX2564 0x17 -#define MXIC_ID_MX2580 0x14 -#define MXIC_ID_MX25128 0x18 +#define MXIC_ID_MD_MX251605D 0x15 /* MD : Memory Density */ +#define MXIC_ID_MT_MX251605D 0x20 /* MT : Memory Type */ +#define MXIC_ID_MD_MX253205D 0x16 /* MD : Memory Density */ +#define MXIC_ID_MT_MX253205D 0x20 /* MT : Memory Type */ +#define MXIC_ID_MD_MX256405D 0x17 /* MD : Memory Density */ +#define MXIC_ID_MT_MX256405D 0x20 /* MT : Memory Type */ +#define MXIC_ID_MD_MX2512805D 0x18 /* MD : Memory Density */ +#define MXIC_ID_MT_MX2512805D 0x20 /* MT : Memory Type */ +#define MXIC_ID_MD_MX2512855E 0x18 /* MD : Memory Density */ +#define MXIC_ID_MT_MX2512855E 0x26 /* MT : Memory Type */

#define MACRONIX_SR_WIP (1 << 0) /* Write-in-Progress */

struct macronix_spi_flash_params {

• u8 idcode0; u8 idcode1; u16 page_size; u16 pages_per_sector;

@@ -81,13 +85,50 @@ static inline struct macronix_spi_flash *to_macronix_spi_flash(struct spi_flash

static const struct macronix_spi_flash_params macronix_spi_flash_table[] = { {

• .idcode1 = MXIC_ID_MX25128,
  

• .idcode0 = MXIC_ID_MT_MX251605D,
  

• .idcode1 = MXIC_ID_MD_MX251605D,
  

• .page_size = 256,
  

• .pages_per_sector = 16,
  

• .sectors_per_block = 16,
  

• .nr_blocks = 32,
  

• .name = "MX25L1605D",
  

• },
• {

• .idcode0 = MXIC_ID_MT_MX253205D,
  

• .idcode1 = MXIC_ID_MD_MX253205D,
  

• .page_size = 256,
  

• .pages_per_sector = 16,
  

• .sectors_per_block = 16,
  

• .nr_blocks = 64,
  

• .name = "MX25L3205D",
  

• },
• {

• .idcode0 = MXIC_ID_MT_MX256405D,
  

• .idcode1 = MXIC_ID_MD_MX256405D,
  

• .page_size = 256,
  

• .pages_per_sector = 16,
  

• .sectors_per_block = 16,
  

• .nr_blocks = 128,
  

• .name = "MX25L6405D",
  

• },
• {

• .idcode0 = MXIC_ID_MT_MX2512805D,
  

• .idcode1 = MXIC_ID_MD_MX2512805D,
  

  .page_size = 256, .pages_per_sector = 16, .sectors_per_block = 16, .nr_blocks = 256, .name = "MX25L12805D", },
• {

• .idcode0 = MXIC_ID_MT_MX2512855E,
  

• .idcode1 = MXIC_ID_MD_MX2512855E,
  

• .page_size = 256,
  

• .pages_per_sector = 16,
  

• .sectors_per_block = 16,
  

• .nr_blocks = 256,
  

• .name = "MX25L12855E",
  

• },

};

can you compare the code size to see if combining the id's in a u16 is better than comparing multiple u8's ?

and creating a dedicated list of defines for the id's isnt really necessary. using them inline in the structure itself is fine.

for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(macronix_spi_flash_table); i++) { params = &macronix_spi_flash_table[i];

• if (params->idcode1 == idcode[2])
  

•            if (params->idcode1 == idcode[2] && params->idcode0 ==
  

idcode[1]) break; }

if (i == ARRAY_SIZE(macronix_spi_flash_table)) {

• debug("SF: Unsupported Macronix ID %02x\n", idcode[1]);
  

•            debug("SF: Unsupported Macronix ID %02x%02x\n",
  

idcode[1],idcode[2]); return NULL; }

Change log:- v2: white space removed for clean patch apply build error fixed

looks like you broke whitespace in this version. you changed these if statements to use leading spaces, not tabs. -mike