[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 2/8] sf: spansion: Add support for S25FL128S_64K
This commit is based on the patch from Xie Xiaobo X.Xie@freescale.com with commit head title as "sf: spansion: Add support for S25FL128S". pulled the same code changes into current u-boot tree with little update on the name field.
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/218145/
SPANSION recommend S25FL128S supersedes S25FL129P, and the two flash memory have the same device ID and Memory architecture. So they can use the same config parameters.
Signed-off-by: Xie Xiaobo X.Xie@freescale.com Signed-off-by: Jagannadha Sutradharudu Teki jaganna@xilinx.com --- Changes for v2: - none
drivers/mtd/spi/spansion.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi/spansion.c b/drivers/mtd/spi/spansion.c index 2218e2f..dad4fbb 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/spi/spansion.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi/spansion.c @@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ static const struct spansion_spi_flash_params spansion_spi_flash_table[] = { .idcode2 = 0x4d01, .pages_per_sector = 256, .nr_sectors = 256, - .name = "S25FL129P_64K", + .name = "S25FL129P_64K/S25FL128S_64K", }, { .idcode1 = 0x0219,
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Jagannadha Sutradharudu Teki jagannadha.sutradharudu-teki@xilinx.com wrote:
This commit is based on the patch from Xie Xiaobo X.Xie@freescale.com with commit head title as "sf: spansion: Add support for S25FL128S". pulled the same code changes into current u-boot tree with little update on the name field.
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/218145/
SPANSION recommend S25FL128S supersedes S25FL129P, and the two flash memory have the same device ID and Memory architecture. So they can use the same config parameters.
Signed-off-by: Xie Xiaobo X.Xie@freescale.com Signed-off-by: Jagannadha Sutradharudu Teki jaganna@xilinx.com
Changes for v2: - none
drivers/mtd/spi/spansion.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi/spansion.c b/drivers/mtd/spi/spansion.c index 2218e2f..dad4fbb 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/spi/spansion.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi/spansion.c @@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ static const struct spansion_spi_flash_params spansion_spi_flash_table[] = { .idcode2 = 0x4d01, .pages_per_sector = 256, .nr_sectors = 256,
.name = "S25FL129P_64K",
.name = "S25FL129P_64K/S25FL128S_64K",
Any comments on this notation, as the ID's are same for these parts upto 5bytes. if you need to differ then we should read the 6th byte.
If i.e the case increase the byte count on probe function for this, due to extra over head only for this, i just noted like this. does it make sense?
Request comments.
-- Thanks, Jagan.
participants (2)
-
Jagan Teki -
Jagannadha Sutradharudu Teki