Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 10 Dec 2025 17:06:11 +0530 | | From | Santhosh Kumar K <> | | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 01/10] spi: spi-mem: Introduce support for tuning controller |
| |
On 03/12/25 19:42, Michael Walle wrote: > On Wed Dec 3, 2025 at 10:50 AM CET, Miquel Raynal wrote: >> >>>>> I think we should start with the requirement to have the pattern flashed >>>>> already and figure out how SPI NOR or SPI NAND can discover that >>>>> (perhaps via NVMEM?). >>> >>> But we should also keep in mind that certain flashes might return >>> tuning data during the dummy cycles. I.e. the PHY might probably be >>> tuned on each read and there is no need for any pre-programmed >>> pattern. >>> >>> I'm not saying it should be implemented, but the current >>> implementation should be that flexible that it will be easy to add >>> that later. >> >> Conceptually, yes, but in practice, I know no controller capable of >> using just a few cycles every transfer to calibrate themselves >> automatically and reaching such an optimized speed state as the cadence >> controller is capable of ATM. > > Then have a look at the flexspi controller. I.e. look at the LS1028A > reference manual "18.5.15.1 Data Learning with Flash providing > preamble bit". The sequence is a follows: > > <CMD> <ADDR> <MODE> <DUMMY> <LEARN> <READ> > > There's an example with the learning pattern as short as 8 bit, or > - I guess - 8 clock cycles.
In this case, we can skip calling execute_tuning, since *_exec_op would be able to perform the necessary tuning, right?
Regards, Santhosh.
> >> Despite the end result being close, I would still consider this other >> way to optimize the I/Os somewhat orthogonal. If someone has some >> knowledge to share about the training patterns sent during the dummy >> cycles, I am all ears though. > > There's also a short chapter about the training. Basically, it will > just compare the read bits with a predefined value (which is max > 32 bit long) of 16 different clock phases. Which one is chosen is > not answered though (ideally it should be the one at the center of > all matching clock phases). > > Now how good that tuning actually is, I don't know. But the > procedure sounds sane. I'm also not sure whether this (any?) tuning > will account for different I/O trace lengths of if it is assumed > that they have to be trace length matched for multi IO flashes. > > -michael
|  |