lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Aug]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH v2 2/2] mtd: rawnand: meson: add support for Amlogic NAND flash controller
From
Date

On 8/29/2018 6:08 PM, Liang Yang wrote:
>
> On 8/28/2018 9:26 PM, Boris Brezillon wrote:
>> On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 21:21:48 +0800
>> Liang Yang <liang.yang@amlogic.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Boris,
>>>
>>> On 8/24/2018 8:48 PM, Boris Brezillon wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 22:08:42 +0800
>>>> Liang Yang <liang.yang@amlogic.com> wrote:
>>>>>> You have to wait tWB, that's for sure.
>>>>> we have a maximum 32 commands fifo. when command is written into
>>>>> NFC_REG_CMD, it doesn't mean that command is executing right now,
>>>>> maybe
>>>>> it is buffering on the queue.Assume one ERASE operation, when 2nd
>>>>> command(0xd0) is written into NFC_REG_CMD and then come into
>>>>> NAND_OP_WAITRDY_INSTR, if I read the RB status by register, it may be
>>>>> wrong because 0xd0 may not being executed. it is unusual unless
>>>>> buffering two many command.
>>>>
>>>> You should flush the queue and wait for it to empty at the end of
>>>> ->exec_op().
>>>>> so it seems that i still need to use nand_soft_waitrdy or wait cmd is
>>>>> executed somewhere.
>>>>
>>>> Don't you have a WAIT_FOR_RB instruction? What is NFC_CMD_RB for? Also,
>>>> NFC_CMD_IDLE seems to allow you to add an arbitrary delay, and that's
>>>> probably what you should use for tWB.
>>>>
>>>> em, I can wait for RB by reading the status from register now. but when
>>> calling nand_soft_waitrdy, i really met a problem. One *jiffies* is
>>> about 4ms. When programming, it pass 1ms to
>>> instr->ctx.waitrdy.timeout_ms and nand_soft_waitrdy will be only one
>>> *jiffies* to reach timeout. And then calling nand_soft_waitrdy maybe at
>>> the tail of 4ms interval, it may only wait 100us and next jiffies
>>> arrive. Is it correct?
>>
>> Hm, no. If you initialize the time you compare to (using time_before()
>> or time_after()) correctly it should not happen. Anyway, I keep thinking
>> this is not how it should be done. Did you try NFC_CMD_RB? Did you ask
>> HW designers what it was created for?
>>
> I am using NFC_CMD_RB and checking with irq. it is ok now.
there are two usages for NFC_CMD_RB. One reads the data status
continuously by hardware after sending 0x70 command; the other checks
the r/b IO status continuously.both can send irq when r/b is ready.

>> .
>>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-08-29 12:29    [W:0.090 / U:1.164 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site