lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Feb]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] mtd: rawnand: qcom: update last code word register
On 2021-02-24 22:06, Miquel Raynal wrote:
> Hello,
>
> mdalam@codeaurora.org wrote on Wed, 24 Feb 2021 22:00:05 +0530:
>
>> On 2021-02-24 12:18, Miquel Raynal wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > mdalam@codeaurora.org wrote on Wed, 24 Feb 2021 10:09:48 +0530:
>> >
>> >> On 2021-02-24 01:13, mdalam@codeaurora.org wrote:
>> >> > On 2021-02-23 22:04, Miquel Raynal wrote:
>> >> >> Hello,
>> >> >> >> Md Sadre Alam <mdalam@codeaurora.org> wrote on Tue, 23 Feb 2021
>> >> >> 01:34:27 +0530:
>> >> >> >>> From QPIC version 2.0 onwards new register got added to read last
>> >> >> >> a new
>> >> >> >>> codeword. This change will add the READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_n register.
>> >> >> >> Add support for this READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_n register.
>> >> >> >>> >>> For first three code word READ_LOCATION_n register will be
>> >> >>> use.For last code word READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_n register will be
>> >> >>> use.
>> >> >> >> "
>> >> >> In the case of QPIC v2, codewords 0, 1 and 2 will be accessed through
>> >> >> READ_LOCATION_n, while codeword 3 will be accessed through
>> >> >> READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_n.
>> >> >> "
>> >> >> >> When I read my own sentence, I feel that there is something wrong.
>> >> >> If there are only 4 codewords, I guess a QPIC v2 is able to use
>> >> >> READ_LOCATION_3 or READ_LOCATION_LAST_CW_0 interchangeably. Isn't it?
>> >> >> >> I guess the point of having these "last_cw_n" registers is to support
>> >> >> up to 8 codewords, am I wrong? If this the case, the current patch
>> >> >> completely fails doing that I don't get the point of such change.
>> >> >
>> >> > This register is only use to read last code word.
>> >> >
>> >> > I have address all the comments from all the previous sub sequent
>> >> > patches and pushed
>> >> > all patches in only one series.
>> >> >
>> >> > Please check.
>> >> >> The registers READ_LOCATION & READ_LOCATION_LAST are not associated >> with number of code words.
>> >> These two registers are used to access the location inside a code >> word.
>> >
>> > Ok. Can you please explain what is a location then? Or point me to a
>> > datasheet that explains it.
>>
>> The location is the position inside a code word.
>>
>> >
>> > Bottom line question: why having READ_LOCATION_0, _1,... an
>> > READ_LOCATION_LAST_0, _1, etc?
>>
>> READ_LOCATION_0, _1,... are used to extract multiple chunks from a
>> code word.
>>
>> e.g If we wanted to extract first 100 bytes from a code word then
>> (0...99) READ_LOCATION_0 will be configured.
>> if we wanted to extract next 100 bytes (100...199) then
>> READ_LOCATION_1 will be configured.
>>
>> same way for last code word READ_LOCATION_LAST_0, _1, will be
>> used.
>>
>
> Nice explanation, and thanks for the below figures. So I guess there
> is some kind of "small SRAM" that is
> directly addressable perhaps?
>
> I think I'm fine with your series now. Just a small nit: next time you
> send a series, please update the version number "[PATCH v6]"
> (automatically added with the -v6 parameter in git-format-patch). But
> no need to resend just for that.
>

Thanks Miquel. So now no need to test these patches further. I have
already tested these patches on IPQ5018 SoC with mtd_test module &
nand-utils tool.

>
> Thanks,
> Miquèl

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-02-26 19:27    [W:0.301 / U:0.124 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site