On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 12:36:40 AM, Jagan Teki wrote:
On 19 August 2015 at 03:33, Marek Vasut marex@denx.de wrote:
On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 12:32:54 PM, Jagan Teki wrote:
This patch adds flag status register reading support to spi_flash_cmd_wait_ready.
Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki jteki@openedev.com Cc: Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org Cc: Marek Vasut marex@denx.de Cc: Michal Simek michal.simek@xilinx.com Cc: Siva Durga Prasad Paladugu sivadur@xilinx.com Cc: Stefan Roese sr@denx.de Cc: Tom Warren twarren@nvidia.com Cc: Bin Meng bmeng.cn@gmail.com Cc: Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com Cc: Hou Zhiqiang B48286@freescale.com Tested-by: Jagan Teki jteki@openedev.com
drivers/mtd/spi/sf_internal.h | 1 + drivers/mtd/spi/sf_ops.c | 66
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- drivers/mtd/spi/sf_probe.c
| 4 +--
include/spi_flash.h | 2 -- 4 files changed, 62 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_internal.h b/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_internal.h index e97c716..4ecfd0c 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_internal.h +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_internal.h @@ -49,6 +49,7 @@ enum {
enum spi_nor_option_flags {
SNOR_F_SST_WR = (1 << 0),
SNOR_F_USE_FSR = (1 << 1),};
#define SPI_FLASH_3B_ADDR_LEN 3
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_ops.c b/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_ops.c index 7d7c264..a5487ad 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_ops.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_ops.c @@ -40,6 +40,21 @@ int spi_flash_cmd_read_status(struct spi_flash *flash, u8 *rs) return 0;
}
+static int read_fsr(struct spi_flash *flash, u8 *fsr) +{
int ret;u8 cmd;cmd = CMD_FLAG_STATUS;ret = spi_flash_read_common(flash, &cmd, 1, fsr, 1);if (ret < 0) {debug("SF: fail to read flag status register\n");return ret;}return 0;+}
int spi_flash_cmd_write_status(struct spi_flash *flash, u8 ws) {
u8 cmd;@@ -138,24 +153,63 @@ static void spi_flash_dual_flash(struct spi_flash *flash, u32 *addr) }
#endif
+static inline int spi_flash_sr_ready(struct spi_flash *flash) +{
u8 sr;int ret;ret = spi_flash_cmd_read_status(flash, &sr);if (ret < 0)return ret;if (sr < 0)Have you ever seen u8 value that's < 0 ? :-)
Yes, over looked, It's been fixed on next patches as well.
Please don't apply broken code, fix this and repost.
Best regards, Marek Vasut