| Message ID | 20231031120307.1600689-1-quic_mdalam@quicinc.com |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add QPIC SPI NAND driver support | expand |
Hi, quic_mdalam@quicinc.com wrote on Tue, 31 Oct 2023 17:33:03 +0530: Commit log is missing. > Signed-off-by: Md Sadre Alam <quic_mdalam@quicinc.com> > Signed-off-by: Sricharan R <quic_srichara@quicinc.com> If Sricharan is a co developer you need to use the right tags. Please have a look at the documentation. Using the two SoB here does not mean anything. > --- > drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig | 7 ++ > drivers/mtd/nand/Makefile | 1 + > drivers/mtd/nand/ecc-qcom.c | 198 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 3 files changed, 206 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 drivers/mtd/nand/ecc-qcom.c > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig b/drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig > index 5b0c2c95f10c..333cec8187c8 100644 > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig > @@ -61,6 +61,13 @@ config MTD_NAND_ECC_MEDIATEK > help > This enables support for the hardware ECC engine from Mediatek. > > +config MTD_NAND_ECC_QCOM > + tristate "Qualcomm hardware ECC engine" > + depends on ARCH_QCOM Same comment as Mark regarding COMPILE_TEST > + select MTD_NAND_ECC > + help > + This enables support for the hardware ECC engine from Qualcomm. > + > endmenu > > endmenu > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/Makefile b/drivers/mtd/nand/Makefile > index 19e1291ac4d5..c73b8a3456ec 100644 > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/Makefile > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/Makefile > @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ > nandcore-objs := core.o bbt.o > obj-$(CONFIG_MTD_NAND_CORE) += nandcore.o > obj-$(CONFIG_MTD_NAND_ECC_MEDIATEK) += ecc-mtk.o > +obj-$(CONFIG_MTD_NAND_ECC_QCOM) += ecc-qcom.o qpic_common.o > > obj-y += onenand/ > obj-y += raw/ > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/ecc-qcom.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/ecc-qcom.c > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..a85423ed368a > --- /dev/null > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/ecc-qcom.c > @@ -0,0 +1,198 @@ > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 OR MIT > +/* > + * QCOM ECC Engine Driver. > + * Copyright (C) 2023 Qualcomm Inc. > + * Authors: Md sadre Alam <quic_mdalam@quicinc.com> > + * Sricharan R <quic_srichara@quicinc.com> > + */ > + > +#include <linux/platform_device.h> > +#include <linux/dma-mapping.h> > +#include <linux/interrupt.h> > +#include <linux/clk.h> > +#include <linux/module.h> > +#include <linux/iopoll.h> > +#include <linux/of.h> > +#include <linux/of_platform.h> > +#include <linux/mutex.h> > +#include <linux/mtd/nand-qpic-common.h> > + > + > + > +/* ECC modes supported by the controller */ > +#define ECC_NONE BIT(0) > +#define ECC_RS_4BIT BIT(1) > +#define ECC_BCH_4BIT BIT(2) > +#define ECC_BCH_8BIT BIT(3) > + > +struct qpic_ecc_caps { > + u32 err_mask; > + u32 err_shift; > + const u8 *ecc_strength; > + const u32 *ecc_regs; > + u8 num_ecc_strength; > + u8 ecc_mode_shift; > + u32 parity_bits; > + int pg_irq_sel; > +}; > + > + > +struct qcom_nand_host *to_qcom_nand_host(struct nand_chip *chip) > +{ > + return container_of(chip, struct qcom_nand_host, chip); > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(to_qcom_nand_host); > + > +struct qcom_nand_controller * > +get_qcom_nand_controller(struct nand_chip *chip) > +{ > + return container_of(chip->controller, struct qcom_nand_controller, > + controller); > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(get_qcom_nand_controller); > + > +static struct qpic_ecc *qpic_ecc_get(struct device_node *np) > +{ > + struct platform_device *pdev; > + struct qpic_ecc *ecc; > + > + pdev = of_find_device_by_node(np); > + if (!pdev) > + return ERR_PTR(-EPROBE_DEFER); > + > + ecc = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); > + if (!ecc) { > + put_device(&pdev->dev); > + return ERR_PTR(-EPROBE_DEFER); > + } > + > + return ecc; > +} > + > +struct qpic_ecc *of_qpic_ecc_get(struct device_node *of_node) > +{ > + struct qpic_ecc *ecc = NULL; > + struct device_node *np; > + > + np = of_parse_phandle(of_node, "nand-ecc-engine", 0); > + /* for backward compatibility */ There is no backward compatibility to handle upstream > + if (!np) > + np = of_parse_phandle(of_node, "ecc-engine", 0); > + if (np) { > + ecc = qpic_ecc_get(np); > + of_node_put(np); > + } > + > + return ecc; > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(of_qpic_ecc_get); > + > +int qcom_ecc_config(struct qpic_ecc *ecc, int ecc_strength, > + bool wide_bus) > +{ > + ecc->ecc_modes = (ECC_RS_4BIT | ECC_BCH_8BIT); > + > + if (ecc_strength >= 8) { If your engine does not support more than an 8-bit strength this condition seems a bit strange. > + /* 8 bit ECC defaults to BCH ECC on all platforms */ > + ecc->bch_enabled = true; > + ecc->ecc_mode = 1; ecc_modes above, ecc_mode here, not very clear what this is. Please give meaningful names to your variables, not just the bit name that this is capturing because here it's unclear what this is. > + > + if (wide_bus) { > + ecc->ecc_bytes_hw = 14; > + ecc->spare_bytes = 0; Spare bytes depend on the flash, you can't use constant values like that. I also don't understand what wide_bus is and why it has an impact of only 1 on the number of ECC bytes. Please make all this more explicit. > + ecc->bbm_size = 2; > + } else { > + ecc->ecc_bytes_hw = 13; > + ecc->spare_bytes = 2; > + ecc->bbm_size = 1; > + } > + } else { > + /* > + * if the controller supports BCH for 4 bit ECC, the controller > + * uses lesser bytes for ECC. If RS is used, the ECC bytes is > + * always 10 bytes > + */ > + if (ecc->ecc_modes & ECC_BCH_4BIT) { > + /* BCH */ > + ecc->bch_enabled = true; > + ecc->ecc_mode = 0; > + if (wide_bus) { > + ecc->ecc_bytes_hw = 8; > + ecc->spare_bytes = 2; > + ecc->bbm_size = 2; > + } else { > + ecc->ecc_bytes_hw = 7; > + ecc->spare_bytes = 4; > + ecc->bbm_size = 1; > + } > + } else { > + /* RS */ > + ecc->ecc_bytes_hw = 10; > + if (wide_bus) { > + ecc->spare_bytes = 0; > + ecc->bbm_size = 2; > + } else { > + ecc->spare_bytes = 1; > + ecc->bbm_size = 1; > + } > + } > + } > + > + return 0; > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_ecc_config); Thanks, Miquèl
On 31/10/2023 13:03, Md Sadre Alam wrote: Eh? Empty? > Signed-off-by: Md Sadre Alam <quic_mdalam@quicinc.com> > Signed-off-by: Sricharan R <quic_srichara@quicinc.com> > --- > drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig | 7 ++ > drivers/mtd/nand/Makefile | 1 + > drivers/mtd/nand/ecc-qcom.c | 198 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 3 files changed, 206 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 drivers/mtd/nand/ecc-qcom.c > ... > + > + return 0; > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_ecc_config); > + > +void qcom_ecc_enable(struct qcom_ecc *ecc) > +{ > + ecc->use_ecc = true; > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_ecc_enable); Drop this and all other exports. Nothing here explains the need for them. > + > +void qcom_ecc_disable(struct qcom_ecc *ecc) > +{ > + ecc->use_ecc = false; > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_ecc_disable); > + > +static const struct of_device_id qpic_ecc_dt_match[] = { > + { > + .compatible = "qcom,ipq9574-ecc", Please run scripts/checkpatch.pl and fix reported warnings. Some warnings can be ignored, but the code here looks like it needs a fix. Feel free to get in touch if the warning is not clear. Checkpatch is preerquisite. Don't send patches which have obvious issues pointed out by checkpatch. It's a waste of reviewers time. > + }, > + {}, > +}; > + > +static int qpic_ecc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > +{ > + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev; > + struct qpic_ecc *ecc; > + u32 max_eccdata_size; > + > + ecc = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*ecc), GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!ecc) > + return -ENOMEM; > + > + ecc->caps = of_device_get_match_data(dev); > + > + ecc->dev = dev; > + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, ecc); > + dev_info(dev, "probed\n"); No, no such messages. Best regards, Krzysztof
On 31/10/2023 13:03, Md Sadre Alam wrote: > Add qpic spi nand driver support for qcom soc. What is "qcom soc"? Did you mean Qualcomm and SoC? > > Signed-off-by: Md Sadre Alam <quic_mdalam@quicinc.com> > Signed-off-by: Sricharan R <quic_srichara@quicinc.com> > --- > drivers/spi/Kconfig | 7 + > drivers/spi/Makefile | 1 + > drivers/spi/spi-qpic-snand.c | 604 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 3 files changed, 612 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 drivers/spi/spi-qpic-snand.c > ... > + > +static int qcom_snand_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) > +{ > + struct spi_controller *ctlr = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); > + spi_unregister_master(ctlr); > + > + return 0; > +} > + > +static const struct qcom_nandc_props ipq9574_snandc_props = { > + .dev_cmd_reg_start = 0x7000, > + .is_bam = true, > + .qpic_v2 = true, > +}; > + > +static const struct of_device_id qcom_snandc_of_match[] = { > + { > + .compatible = "qcom,ipq9574-nand", Please run scripts/checkpatch.pl and fix reported warnings. Some warnings can be ignored, but the code here looks like it needs a fix. Feel free to get in touch if the warning is not clear. Best regards, Krzysztof
On 10/31/2023 8:58 PM, Miquel Raynal wrote: > Hi, > > quic_mdalam@quicinc.com wrote on Tue, 31 Oct 2023 17:33:03 +0530: > > Commit log is missing. Having a separate device node for ECC was NAK-ed https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-arm-msm/msg177596.html It is fine to drop this patch ? keep ECC support inlined in both raw nand and Serial nand driver. > >> Signed-off-by: Md Sadre Alam <quic_mdalam@quicinc.com> >> Signed-off-by: Sricharan R <quic_srichara@quicinc.com> > > If Sricharan is a co developer you need to use the right tags. Please > have a look at the documentation. Using the two SoB here does not mean > anything Ok will fix > >> --- >> drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig | 7 ++ >> drivers/mtd/nand/Makefile | 1 + >> drivers/mtd/nand/ecc-qcom.c | 198 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 3 files changed, 206 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 drivers/mtd/nand/ecc-qcom.c >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig b/drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig >> index 5b0c2c95f10c..333cec8187c8 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig >> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig >> @@ -61,6 +61,13 @@ config MTD_NAND_ECC_MEDIATEK >> help >> This enables support for the hardware ECC engine from Mediatek. >> >> +config MTD_NAND_ECC_QCOM >> + tristate "Qualcomm hardware ECC engine" >> + depends on ARCH_QCOM > > Same comment as Mark regarding COMPILE_TEST Ok > >> + select MTD_NAND_ECC >> + help >> + This enables support for the hardware ECC engine from Qualcomm. >> + >> endmenu >> >> endmenu >> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/Makefile b/drivers/mtd/nand/Makefile >> index 19e1291ac4d5..c73b8a3456ec 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/Makefile >> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/Makefile >> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ >> nandcore-objs := core.o bbt.o >> obj-$(CONFIG_MTD_NAND_CORE) += nandcore.o >> obj-$(CONFIG_MTD_NAND_ECC_MEDIATEK) += ecc-mtk.o >> +obj-$(CONFIG_MTD_NAND_ECC_QCOM) += ecc-qcom.o qpic_common.o >> >> obj-y += onenand/ >> obj-y += raw/ >> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/ecc-qcom.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/ecc-qcom.c >> new file mode 100644 >> index 000000000000..a85423ed368a >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/ecc-qcom.c >> @@ -0,0 +1,198 @@ >> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 OR MIT >> +/* >> + * QCOM ECC Engine Driver. >> + * Copyright (C) 2023 Qualcomm Inc. >> + * Authors: Md sadre Alam <quic_mdalam@quicinc.com> >> + * Sricharan R <quic_srichara@quicinc.com> >> + */ >> + >> +#include <linux/platform_device.h> >> +#include <linux/dma-mapping.h> >> +#include <linux/interrupt.h> >> +#include <linux/clk.h> >> +#include <linux/module.h> >> +#include <linux/iopoll.h> >> +#include <linux/of.h> >> +#include <linux/of_platform.h> >> +#include <linux/mutex.h> >> +#include <linux/mtd/nand-qpic-common.h> >> + >> + >> + >> +/* ECC modes supported by the controller */ >> +#define ECC_NONE BIT(0) >> +#define ECC_RS_4BIT BIT(1) >> +#define ECC_BCH_4BIT BIT(2) >> +#define ECC_BCH_8BIT BIT(3) >> + >> +struct qpic_ecc_caps { >> + u32 err_mask; >> + u32 err_shift; >> + const u8 *ecc_strength; >> + const u32 *ecc_regs; >> + u8 num_ecc_strength; >> + u8 ecc_mode_shift; >> + u32 parity_bits; >> + int pg_irq_sel; >> +}; >> + >> + >> +struct qcom_nand_host *to_qcom_nand_host(struct nand_chip *chip) >> +{ >> + return container_of(chip, struct qcom_nand_host, chip); >> +} >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(to_qcom_nand_host); >> + >> +struct qcom_nand_controller * >> +get_qcom_nand_controller(struct nand_chip *chip) >> +{ >> + return container_of(chip->controller, struct qcom_nand_controller, >> + controller); >> +} >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(get_qcom_nand_controller); >> + >> +static struct qpic_ecc *qpic_ecc_get(struct device_node *np) >> +{ >> + struct platform_device *pdev; >> + struct qpic_ecc *ecc; >> + >> + pdev = of_find_device_by_node(np); >> + if (!pdev) >> + return ERR_PTR(-EPROBE_DEFER); >> + >> + ecc = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); >> + if (!ecc) { >> + put_device(&pdev->dev); >> + return ERR_PTR(-EPROBE_DEFER); >> + } >> + >> + return ecc; >> +} >> + >> +struct qpic_ecc *of_qpic_ecc_get(struct device_node *of_node) >> +{ >> + struct qpic_ecc *ecc = NULL; >> + struct device_node *np; >> + >> + np = of_parse_phandle(of_node, "nand-ecc-engine", 0); >> + /* for backward compatibility */ > > There is no backward compatibility to handle upstream Ok will fix in V1 > >> + if (!np) >> + np = of_parse_phandle(of_node, "ecc-engine", 0); >> + if (np) { >> + ecc = qpic_ecc_get(np); >> + of_node_put(np); >> + } >> + >> + return ecc; >> +} >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(of_qpic_ecc_get); >> + >> +int qcom_ecc_config(struct qpic_ecc *ecc, int ecc_strength, >> + bool wide_bus) >> +{ >> + ecc->ecc_modes = (ECC_RS_4BIT | ECC_BCH_8BIT); >> + >> + if (ecc_strength >= 8) { > > If your engine does not support more than an 8-bit strength this > condition seems a bit strange. Max ECC supported 8-bit only, forcing it to 8-bit. > >> + /* 8 bit ECC defaults to BCH ECC on all platforms */ >> + ecc->bch_enabled = true; >> + ecc->ecc_mode = 1; > > ecc_modes above, ecc_mode here, not very clear what this is. > Please give meaningful names to your variables, not just the bit name > that this is capturing because here it's unclear what this is. ok will fix in V1 > >> + >> + if (wide_bus) { >> + ecc->ecc_bytes_hw = 14; >> + ecc->spare_bytes = 0; > > Spare bytes depend on the flash, you can't use constant values like > that. Ok will fix in V1 > > I also don't understand what wide_bus is and why it has an impact of > only 1 on the number of ECC bytes. Please make all this more explicit. wide_bus 1 means 16-bit wide and wide_bus 0 means 8-bit wide. there different configuration for ecc config for 16-bit wide bus and 8-bit wide bus. This is recommended configuration by IP team, Will reconfirm this with IP folks and come back. Regards, Alam.
On 03/11/2023 13:06, Md Sadre Alam wrote: > > > On 10/31/2023 8:58 PM, Miquel Raynal wrote: >> Hi, >> >> quic_mdalam@quicinc.com wrote on Tue, 31 Oct 2023 17:33:03 +0530: >> >> Commit log is missing. > > Having a separate device node for ECC was NAK-ed > https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-arm-msm/msg177596.html It was NAKed because it was not ready for submission. Please perform internal review, which will fix such trivial issues, before posting on mailing lists. Since you did not post any bindings, we could not have even discussion whether this is acceptable or not... Best regards, Krzysztof
On 03/11/2023 13:08, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 03/11/2023 13:06, Md Sadre Alam wrote: >> >> >> On 10/31/2023 8:58 PM, Miquel Raynal wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> quic_mdalam@quicinc.com wrote on Tue, 31 Oct 2023 17:33:03 +0530: >>> >>> Commit log is missing. >> >> Having a separate device node for ECC was NAK-ed >> https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-arm-msm/msg177596.html > > It was NAKed because it was not ready for submission. Please perform > internal review, which will fix such trivial issues, before posting on > mailing lists. To clarify: trivial issues including compile-like testing the code, not even on the hardware, but with automated, open-source tools like checkpatch, dtc and dtbs_check. It's like sending driver code which has obvious warnings. Best regards, Krzysztof
On 10/31/2023 10:43 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 31/10/2023 13:03, Md Sadre Alam wrote: >> Add qpic spi nand driver support for qcom soc. > > What is "qcom soc"? Did you mean Qualcomm and SoC? Yes Qualcomm SoC > >> >> Signed-off-by: Md Sadre Alam <quic_mdalam@quicinc.com> >> Signed-off-by: Sricharan R <quic_srichara@quicinc.com> >> --- >> drivers/spi/Kconfig | 7 + >> drivers/spi/Makefile | 1 + >> drivers/spi/spi-qpic-snand.c | 604 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 3 files changed, 612 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 drivers/spi/spi-qpic-snand.c >> > > ... > >> + >> +static int qcom_snand_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) >> +{ >> + struct spi_controller *ctlr = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); >> + spi_unregister_master(ctlr); >> + >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> +static const struct qcom_nandc_props ipq9574_snandc_props = { >> + .dev_cmd_reg_start = 0x7000, >> + .is_bam = true, >> + .qpic_v2 = true, >> +}; >> + >> +static const struct of_device_id qcom_snandc_of_match[] = { >> + { >> + .compatible = "qcom,ipq9574-nand", > > Please run scripts/checkpatch.pl and fix reported warnings. Some > warnings can be ignored, but the code here looks like it needs a fix. > Feel free to get in touch if the warning is not clear. Ok > > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
On 10/31/2023 10:43 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 31/10/2023 13:03, Md Sadre Alam wrote: >> Add qpic spi nand driver support for qcom soc. > > What is "qcom soc"? Did you mean Qualcomm and SoC? Yes Qualcomm SoC > >> >> Signed-off-by: Md Sadre Alam <quic_mdalam@quicinc.com> >> Signed-off-by: Sricharan R <quic_srichara@quicinc.com> >> --- >> drivers/spi/Kconfig | 7 + >> drivers/spi/Makefile | 1 + >> drivers/spi/spi-qpic-snand.c | 604 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 3 files changed, 612 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 drivers/spi/spi-qpic-snand.c >> > > ... > >> + >> +static int qcom_snand_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) >> +{ >> + struct spi_controller *ctlr = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); >> + spi_unregister_master(ctlr); >> + >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> +static const struct qcom_nandc_props ipq9574_snandc_props = { >> + .dev_cmd_reg_start = 0x7000, >> + .is_bam = true, >> + .qpic_v2 = true, >> +}; >> + >> +static const struct of_device_id qcom_snandc_of_match[] = { >> + { >> + .compatible = "qcom,ipq9574-nand", > > Please run scripts/checkpatch.pl and fix reported warnings. Some > warnings can be ignored, but the code here looks like it needs a fix. > Feel free to get in touch if the warning is not clear. Ok > > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
On 03/11/2023 13:13, Md Sadre Alam wrote: > > > On 10/31/2023 10:43 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 31/10/2023 13:03, Md Sadre Alam wrote: >>> Add qpic spi nand driver support for qcom soc. >> >> What is "qcom soc"? Did you mean Qualcomm and SoC? > > Yes Qualcomm SoC > Then please use full sentences and full names with proper capitalization of letters for acronyms. Best regards, Krzysztof
On 10/31/2023 10:41 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 31/10/2023 13:03, Md Sadre Alam wrote: > > Eh? Empty? QPIC controller has the ecc pipelined so will keep the ecc support inlined in both raw nand and serial nand driver. Droping this driver since device node was NAK-ed https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-arm-msm/msg177596.html > >> Signed-off-by: Md Sadre Alam <quic_mdalam@quicinc.com> >> Signed-off-by: Sricharan R <quic_srichara@quicinc.com> >> --- >> drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig | 7 ++ >> drivers/mtd/nand/Makefile | 1 + >> drivers/mtd/nand/ecc-qcom.c | 198 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 3 files changed, 206 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 drivers/mtd/nand/ecc-qcom.c >> > > ... > >> + >> + return 0; >> +} >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_ecc_config); >> + >> +void qcom_ecc_enable(struct qcom_ecc *ecc) >> +{ >> + ecc->use_ecc = true; >> +} >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_ecc_enable); > > Drop this and all other exports. Nothing here explains the need for them. > >> + >> +void qcom_ecc_disable(struct qcom_ecc *ecc) >> +{ >> + ecc->use_ecc = false; >> +} >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_ecc_disable); >> + >> +static const struct of_device_id qpic_ecc_dt_match[] = { >> + { >> + .compatible = "qcom,ipq9574-ecc", > > Please run scripts/checkpatch.pl and fix reported warnings. Some > warnings can be ignored, but the code here looks like it needs a fix. > Feel free to get in touch if the warning is not clear. > > Checkpatch is preerquisite. Don't send patches which have obvious issues > pointed out by checkpatch. It's a waste of reviewers time. > >> + }, >> + {}, >> +}; >> + >> +static int qpic_ecc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> +{ >> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev; >> + struct qpic_ecc *ecc; >> + u32 max_eccdata_size; >> + >> + ecc = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*ecc), GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!ecc) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + >> + ecc->caps = of_device_get_match_data(dev); >> + >> + ecc->dev = dev; >> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, ecc); >> + dev_info(dev, "probed\n"); > > No, no such messages. > > > > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
On Fri, 3 Nov 2023 at 14:25, Md Sadre Alam <quic_mdalam@quicinc.com> wrote: > > > > On 10/31/2023 10:41 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > On 31/10/2023 13:03, Md Sadre Alam wrote: > > > > Eh? Empty? > > QPIC controller has the ecc pipelined so will keep the ecc support > inlined in both raw nand and serial nand driver. > > Droping this driver since device node was NAK-ed > https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-arm-msm/msg177596.html It seems, we have to repeat the same thing again and again: It was not the device node that was NAKed. It was the patch that was NAKed. Please read the emails carefully. And next time please perform dtbs_check, dt_binding_check and checkpatch before sending the patch. It is perfectly fine to ask questions 'like we are getting we are getting this and that issues with the bindings, please advise'. It is not fine to skip that step completely. > > > >> Signed-off-by: Md Sadre Alam <quic_mdalam@quicinc.com> > >> Signed-off-by: Sricharan R <quic_srichara@quicinc.com> > >> --- > >> drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig | 7 ++ > >> drivers/mtd/nand/Makefile | 1 + > >> drivers/mtd/nand/ecc-qcom.c | 198 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> 3 files changed, 206 insertions(+) > >> create mode 100644 drivers/mtd/nand/ecc-qcom.c > >> > > > > ... > > > >> + > >> + return 0; > >> +} > >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_ecc_config); > >> + > >> +void qcom_ecc_enable(struct qcom_ecc *ecc) > >> +{ > >> + ecc->use_ecc = true; > >> +} > >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_ecc_enable); > > > > Drop this and all other exports. Nothing here explains the need for them. > > > >> + > >> +void qcom_ecc_disable(struct qcom_ecc *ecc) > >> +{ > >> + ecc->use_ecc = false; > >> +} > >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_ecc_disable); > >> + > >> +static const struct of_device_id qpic_ecc_dt_match[] = { > >> + { > >> + .compatible = "qcom,ipq9574-ecc", > > > > Please run scripts/checkpatch.pl and fix reported warnings. Some > > warnings can be ignored, but the code here looks like it needs a fix. > > Feel free to get in touch if the warning is not clear. > > > > Checkpatch is preerquisite. Don't send patches which have obvious issues > > pointed out by checkpatch. It's a waste of reviewers time. > > > >> + }, > >> + {}, > >> +}; > >> + > >> +static int qpic_ecc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > >> +{ > >> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev; > >> + struct qpic_ecc *ecc; > >> + u32 max_eccdata_size; > >> + > >> + ecc = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*ecc), GFP_KERNEL); > >> + if (!ecc) > >> + return -ENOMEM; > >> + > >> + ecc->caps = of_device_get_match_data(dev); > >> + > >> + ecc->dev = dev; > >> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, ecc); > >> + dev_info(dev, "probed\n"); > > > > No, no such messages. > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > Krzysztof > >
On 11/3/2023 6:03 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On Fri, 3 Nov 2023 at 14:25, Md Sadre Alam <quic_mdalam@quicinc.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 10/31/2023 10:41 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> On 31/10/2023 13:03, Md Sadre Alam wrote: >>> >>> Eh? Empty? >> >> QPIC controller has the ecc pipelined so will keep the ecc support >> inlined in both raw nand and serial nand driver. >> >> Droping this driver since device node was NAK-ed >> https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-arm-msm/msg177596.html > > It seems, we have to repeat the same thing again and again: > > It was not the device node that was NAKed. It was the patch that was > NAKed. Please read the emails carefully. > > And next time please perform dtbs_check, dt_binding_check and > checkpatch before sending the patch. > > It is perfectly fine to ask questions 'like we are getting we are > getting this and that issues with the bindings, please advise'. It is > not fine to skip that step completely. Sorry in V1 will run all basic checks. Based on below feedback [1] and NAK on the device node patch got idea of having separate device node for ECC is not acceptable. Could you please help to clarify that. Since ECC block is inlined with QPIC controller so is the below device node acceptable ? bch: qpic_ecc { compatible = "qcom,ipq9574-ecc"; status = "ok"; }; [1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-arm-msm/msg177525.html > >>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Md Sadre Alam <quic_mdalam@quicinc.com> >>>> Signed-off-by: Sricharan R <quic_srichara@quicinc.com> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig | 7 ++ >>>> drivers/mtd/nand/Makefile | 1 + >>>> drivers/mtd/nand/ecc-qcom.c | 198 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> 3 files changed, 206 insertions(+) >>>> create mode 100644 drivers/mtd/nand/ecc-qcom.c >>>> >>> >>> ... >>> >>>> + >>>> + return 0; >>>> +} >>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_ecc_config); >>>> + >>>> +void qcom_ecc_enable(struct qcom_ecc *ecc) >>>> +{ >>>> + ecc->use_ecc = true; >>>> +} >>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_ecc_enable); >>> >>> Drop this and all other exports. Nothing here explains the need for them. >>> >>>> + >>>> +void qcom_ecc_disable(struct qcom_ecc *ecc) >>>> +{ >>>> + ecc->use_ecc = false; >>>> +} >>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_ecc_disable); >>>> + >>>> +static const struct of_device_id qpic_ecc_dt_match[] = { >>>> + { >>>> + .compatible = "qcom,ipq9574-ecc", >>> >>> Please run scripts/checkpatch.pl and fix reported warnings. Some >>> warnings can be ignored, but the code here looks like it needs a fix. >>> Feel free to get in touch if the warning is not clear. >>> >>> Checkpatch is preerquisite. Don't send patches which have obvious issues >>> pointed out by checkpatch. It's a waste of reviewers time. >>> >>>> + }, >>>> + {}, >>>> +}; >>>> + >>>> +static int qpic_ecc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >>>> +{ >>>> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev; >>>> + struct qpic_ecc *ecc; >>>> + u32 max_eccdata_size; >>>> + >>>> + ecc = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*ecc), GFP_KERNEL); >>>> + if (!ecc) >>>> + return -ENOMEM; >>>> + >>>> + ecc->caps = of_device_get_match_data(dev); >>>> + >>>> + ecc->dev = dev; >>>> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, ecc); >>>> + dev_info(dev, "probed\n"); >>> >>> No, no such messages. >>> >>> >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Krzysztof >>> > > >
Hello, > Based on below feedback [1] and NAK on the device node patch > got idea of having separate device node for ECC is not acceptable. > Could you please help to clarify that. If I may try to compare with the Macronix situation, the ECC engine was an independent hardware block, with its own mapping and its own registers, so it was described as an independent node in the DT. The type of ECC controller (pipelined or external) is described by the nand-ecc-engine property which either points at the parent node (pipelined) or an external node (external). The SPI host would itself point at the external ECC engine node with its own nand-ecc-engine property (see mtd/mxicy,nand-ecc-engine.yaml in the bindings). > Since ECC block is inlined with QPIC controller so is the below > device node acceptable ? > > bch: qpic_ecc { > compatible = "qcom,ipq9574-ecc"; > status = "ok"; > }; If it does not has its own mapping and if you access the ECC engine through the host registers then the controller should be part of the host node, but I am not sure it really needs to be described explicitly, most of them are not for historical reasons. Conceptually there is a problem with subnodes of each of these controllers having a signification already: SPI devices or NAND chips. Thanks, Miquèl
On Fri, 3 Nov 2023 at 15:24, Md Sadre Alam <quic_mdalam@quicinc.com> wrote: > > > > On 11/3/2023 6:03 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > On Fri, 3 Nov 2023 at 14:25, Md Sadre Alam <quic_mdalam@quicinc.com> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On 10/31/2023 10:41 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >>> On 31/10/2023 13:03, Md Sadre Alam wrote: > >>> > >>> Eh? Empty? > >> > >> QPIC controller has the ecc pipelined so will keep the ecc support > >> inlined in both raw nand and serial nand driver. > >> > >> Droping this driver since device node was NAK-ed > >> https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-arm-msm/msg177596.html > > > > It seems, we have to repeat the same thing again and again: > > > > It was not the device node that was NAKed. It was the patch that was > > NAKed. Please read the emails carefully. > > > > And next time please perform dtbs_check, dt_binding_check and > > checkpatch before sending the patch. > > > > It is perfectly fine to ask questions 'like we are getting we are > > getting this and that issues with the bindings, please advise'. It is > > not fine to skip that step completely. > > Sorry in V1 will run all basic checks. > > Based on below feedback [1] and NAK on the device node patch > got idea of having separate device node for ECC is not acceptable. > Could you please help to clarify that. > > Since ECC block is inlined with QPIC controller so is the below > device node acceptable ? No, the node below is not acceptable. And you have already got two reasons for that. Let me repeat them for you: - it is "okay" not "ok" - no underscores in node names. If you want to have a more meaningful discussion, please provide full ECC + NAND + SPI DT bindings, only then we can discuss them. > bch: qpic_ecc { > compatible = "qcom,ipq9574-ecc"; > status = "ok"; > }; > > [1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-arm-msm/msg177525.html > > > > >>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Md Sadre Alam <quic_mdalam@quicinc.com> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Sricharan R <quic_srichara@quicinc.com> > >>>> --- > >>>> drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig | 7 ++ > >>>> drivers/mtd/nand/Makefile | 1 + > >>>> drivers/mtd/nand/ecc-qcom.c | 198 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>>> 3 files changed, 206 insertions(+) > >>>> create mode 100644 drivers/mtd/nand/ecc-qcom.c > >>>> > >>> > >>> ... > >>> > >>>> + > >>>> + return 0; > >>>> +} > >>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_ecc_config); > >>>> + > >>>> +void qcom_ecc_enable(struct qcom_ecc *ecc) > >>>> +{ > >>>> + ecc->use_ecc = true; > >>>> +} > >>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_ecc_enable); > >>> > >>> Drop this and all other exports. Nothing here explains the need for them. > >>> > >>>> + > >>>> +void qcom_ecc_disable(struct qcom_ecc *ecc) > >>>> +{ > >>>> + ecc->use_ecc = false; > >>>> +} > >>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_ecc_disable); > >>>> + > >>>> +static const struct of_device_id qpic_ecc_dt_match[] = { > >>>> + { > >>>> + .compatible = "qcom,ipq9574-ecc", > >>> > >>> Please run scripts/checkpatch.pl and fix reported warnings. Some > >>> warnings can be ignored, but the code here looks like it needs a fix. > >>> Feel free to get in touch if the warning is not clear. > >>> > >>> Checkpatch is preerquisite. Don't send patches which have obvious issues > >>> pointed out by checkpatch. It's a waste of reviewers time. > >>> > >>>> + }, > >>>> + {}, > >>>> +}; > >>>> + > >>>> +static int qpic_ecc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > >>>> +{ > >>>> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev; > >>>> + struct qpic_ecc *ecc; > >>>> + u32 max_eccdata_size; > >>>> + > >>>> + ecc = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*ecc), GFP_KERNEL); > >>>> + if (!ecc) > >>>> + return -ENOMEM; > >>>> + > >>>> + ecc->caps = of_device_get_match_data(dev); > >>>> + > >>>> + ecc->dev = dev; > >>>> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, ecc); > >>>> + dev_info(dev, "probed\n"); > >>> > >>> No, no such messages. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Best regards, > >>> Krzysztof > >>> > > > > > >
On 11/3/2023 7:16 PM, Miquel Raynal wrote: > Hello, > >> Based on below feedback [1] and NAK on the device node patch >> got idea of having separate device node for ECC is not acceptable. >> Could you please help to clarify that. > > If I may try to compare with the Macronix situation, the ECC engine > was an independent hardware block, with its own mapping and its own > registers, so it was described as an independent node in the DT. The > type of ECC controller (pipelined or external) is described by the > nand-ecc-engine property which either points at the parent node > (pipelined) or an external node (external). The SPI host would itself > point at the external ECC engine node with its own nand-ecc-engine > property (see mtd/mxicy,nand-ecc-engine.yaml in the bindings). Sorry for late reply. Since QPIC controller ECC engine is not a separate HW block. To control ECC functionality there is only one register 4-bytes long.As you suggested above, ECC controller described by the property nand-ecc-engine.I have checked mtd/mxicy,nand-ecc-engine.yaml file and got to know I can use like nand-ecc-engine = <&qpic_nand>; in dts.Now additional ECC node not needed in DTS. Will clean up everything in next patch. > >> Since ECC block is inlined with QPIC controller so is the below >> device node acceptable ? >> >> bch: qpic_ecc { >> compatible = "qcom,ipq9574-ecc"; >> status = "ok"; >> }; > > If it does not has its own mapping and if you access the ECC engine > through the host registers then the controller should be part of the > host node, but I am not sure it really needs to be described > explicitly, most of them are not for historical reasons. Conceptually > there is a problem with subnodes of each of these controllers having > a signification already: SPI devices or NAND chips. New device node for spi nand looks like as below. &qpic_nand { status = "okay"; pinctrl-0 = <&qspi_nand_pins>; pinctrl-names = "default"; spi_nand: spi_nand@0 { compatible = "spi-nand"; reg = <0>; #address-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <1>; nand-ecc-engine = <&qpic_nand>; nand-ecc-strength = <4>; nand-ecc-step-size = <512>; spi-max-frequency = <8000000>; }; }; With the above device node I have tested the spi nand device enumeration its working fine. Will cleanup everything and post in next patch. > > Thanks, > Miquèl
Hi Miquel, This series is RFC for QPIC NAND driver design for both SPI NAND and RAW NAND. We have already discuss this design in the below link https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-msm/patch/1602307902-16761-3-git-send-email-mdalam@codeaurora.org/#25270814 Since QPIC controller support both raw and as wel as serial nand, In these patch series I am trying to write these driver as per above discussion. As per this design we are having new drivrs for: 1) SPI-NAND Driver 2) RAW-NAND Driver 3) QPIC-COMMON-API Driver 4) ECC ENGINE Driver Could you plese review these RFC patches and let me know if i am doing as per design and my code are proper so that i can proceed further. I have testd SPI NAND enumeration with this new design. Command supported currently by spi nand driver 1) RESET 2) READ ID 3) GET FEATURE 4) SET FEATURE Currently READ_PAGE, WRITE_PAGE are dummy API. Will write this later on after your review. One more thisng wanted to add here Since for QPIC ECC engine its not a separte HW IP, and only one register is there to control ECC enable/disable. So for just for one register writing a separte driver is fine or not? In dt I have added like as below bch: qpic_ecc { compatible = "qcom,ipq9574-ecc"; status = "ok"; }; Is this ok ? Thanks, Alam. Md Sadre Alam (5): mtd: nand: ecc-qcom: Add support for ECC Engine Driver arm64: dts: qcom: ipq9574: Add ecc engine support mtd: nand: qpic_common: Add support for qpic common API spi: qpic: Add support for qpic spi nand driver arm64: dts: qcom: ipq9574: Add support for SPI nand arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq9574-rdp433.dts | 56 +- arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq9574.dtsi | 33 + drivers/mtd/nand/Kconfig | 7 + drivers/mtd/nand/Makefile | 1 + drivers/mtd/nand/ecc-qcom.c | 198 +++++ drivers/mtd/nand/qpic_common.c | 840 ++++++++++++++++++++ drivers/spi/Kconfig | 7 + drivers/spi/Makefile | 1 + drivers/spi/spi-qpic-snand.c | 604 ++++++++++++++ include/linux/mtd/nand-qpic-common.h | 641 +++++++++++++++ 10 files changed, 2360 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-) create mode 100644 drivers/mtd/nand/ecc-qcom.c create mode 100644 drivers/mtd/nand/qpic_common.c create mode 100644 drivers/spi/spi-qpic-snand.c create mode 100644 include/linux/mtd/nand-qpic-common.h