Messages in this thread | | | From | NeilBrown <> | Date | Tue, 24 Jul 2018 08:23:27 +1000 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] mtd: spi-nor: clear Extended Address Reg on switch to 3-byte addressing. |
| |
On Mon, Jul 23 2018, Brian Norris wrote:
> Hi Neil, > > On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 2:45 PM, NeilBrown <neil@brown.name> wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 23 2018, Brian Norris wrote: >>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 6:05 PM, NeilBrown <neil@brown.name> wrote: >>>> On Mon, Apr 09 2018, Marek Vasut wrote: >>>>> On 04/08/2018 11:56 PM, NeilBrown wrote: >>>>>> were added to Linux. They appear to be designed to address a very >>>>>> similar situation to mine. Unfortunately they aren't complete as the >>>>>> code to disable 4-byte addressing doesn't follow documented requirements >>>>>> (at least for winbond) and doesn't work as intended (at least in one >>>>>> case - mine). This code should either be fixed (e.g. with my patch), or removed. >>> >>> I would (and already did) vote for removal. The shutdown() hook just >>> papers over bugs and leads people to think that it is a good solution. >>> There's a reason we rejected such patches repeatedly in the past. This >>> one slipped through. >> >> Hi Brian, >> thanks for your thoughts. >> Could you just clarify what you see as the end-game. >> Do you have an alternate approach which can provide reliability for the >> various hardware which currently seems to need these patches? >> Or do you propose that people with this hardware should suffer >> a measurably lower level of reliability than they currently enjoy? > > I'd suggest following the original thread, which I resurrected: > > [PATCHv3 2/2] mtd: m25p80: restore the status of SPI flash when exiting > https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/7/23/1207 > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/845022/
Thanks for the links.
> > I suppose I could CC you on future replies...
No need (though I wouldn't object). Thanks for the heads-up!
> > My current summary: I'd prefer the hack be much more narrowly applied, > with a big warning, if we apply it at all. But if we don't merge > something to narrow the use of the hack, then yes, I'd prefer a > degraded experience for crappy products over today's status quo. > I'm strongly against degrading experience - partly because it could be my experiences, partly because it seems to go against the pragmatic basis of Linux - we build this thing because it is useful. I don't object to highly focuses handling of specific "quirks" - that seems to be an established pattern in Linux.
Thanks, NeilBrown [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |