[PATCH] Support for S25FL164K/S25FL132K

[Nikolay Martynov]

* Updated according to manufacturers datasheet
  (to the best of my abilities to read it)
* Tested with actual S25FL164K via arduino spi

Signed-off-by: Nikolay Martynov 
---
 flashchips.c | 72 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 flashchips.h |  3 +++
 2 files changed, 75 insertions(+)

diff --git a/flashchips.c b/flashchips.c
index a6db11e..3347e4e 100644
--- a/flashchips.c
+++ b/flashchips.c
@@ -9451,6 +9451,78 @@ const struct flashchip flashchips[] = {

{
    	.vendor		= "Spansion",
+		.name		= "S25FL132K",
+		.bustype	= BUS_SPI,
+		.manufacture_id	= SPANSION_ID,
+		.model_id	= SPANSION_S25FL132K,
+		.total_size	= 4096,
+		.page_size	= 256,
+		/* OTP: 1024B total, 256B reserved; read 0x48; write
+		 * 0x42, erase 0x44 */
+		.feature_bits	= FEATURE_WRSR_WREN | FEATURE_OTP,
+		.tested		= TEST_UNTESTED,
+		.probe		= probe_spi_rdid,
+		.probe_timing	= TIMING_ZERO,
+		.block_erasers	= {
+			{
+				.eraseblocks = { {4 * 1024, 1024} },
+				.block_erase = spi_block_erase_20,
+			}, {
+				.eraseblocks = { {64 * 1024, 64} },
+				.block_erase = spi_block_erase_d8,
+			}, {
+				.eraseblocks = { { 4096 * 1024, 1} },
+				.block_erase = spi_block_erase_60,
+			}, {
+				.eraseblocks = { { 4096 * 1024, 1} },
+				.block_erase = spi_block_erase_c7,
+			}
+		},
+		.printlock	= spi_prettyprint_status_register_default_bp3,
+		.unlock		= spi_disable_blockprotect_bp3_srwd,  /* #WP pin write-protects SRWP bit. */
+		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
+		.read		= spi_chip_read, /* Fast read (0x0B), dual I/O  (0x3B) supported */
+		.voltage	= {2700, 3600},
+	},
+
+	{
+		.vendor		= "Spansion",
+		.name		= "S25FL164K",
+		.bustype	= BUS_SPI,
+		.manufacture_id	= SPANSION_ID,
+		.model_id	= SPANSION_S25FL164K,
+		.total_size	= 8192,
+		.page_size	= 256,
+		/* OTP: 1024B total, 256B reserved; read 0x48; write
+		 * 0x42, erase 0x44 */
+		.feature_bits	= FEATURE_WRSR_WREN | FEATURE_OTP,
+		.tested		= TEST_UNTESTED,
+		.probe		= probe_spi_rdid,
+		.probe_timing	= TIMING_ZERO,
+		.block_erasers	= {
+			{
+				.eraseblocks = { {4 * 1024, 2048} },
+				.block_erase = spi_block_erase_20,
+			}, {
+				.eraseblocks = { {64 * 1024, 128} },
+				.block_erase = spi_block_erase_d8,
+			}, {
+				.eraseblocks = { { 8192 * 1024, 1} },
+				.block_erase = spi_block_erase_60,
+			}, {
+				.eraseblocks = { { 8192 * 1024, 1} },
+				.block_erase = spi_block_erase_c7,
+			}
+		},
+		.printlock	= spi_prettyprint_status_register_default_bp3,
+		.unlock		= spi_disable_blockprotect_bp3_srwd,  /* #WP pin write-protects SRWP bit. */
+		.write		= spi_chip_write_256,
+		.read		= spi_chip_read, /* Fast read (0x0B), dual I/O  (0x3B) supported */
+		.voltage	= {2700, 3600},
+	},
+
+	{
+		.vendor		= "Spansion",
    	.name		= "S25FL128S......0", /* uniform 256kB sectors */
    	.bustype	= BUS_SPI,
    	.manufacture_id	= SPANSION_ID,
diff --git a/flashchips.h b/flashchips.h
index e6e5e8a..b0d64be 100644
--- a/flashchips.h
+++ b/flashchips.h
@@ -565,6 +565,9 @@
 #define SPANSION_S25FL204	0x4013
 #define SPANSION_S25FL208	0x4014
 #define SPANSION_S25FL216	0x4015	/* Same as S25FL216K, but the latter supports OTP, 3 status regs, quad I/O, SFDP etc. */
+#define SPANSION_S25FL132K	0x4016
+#define SPANSION_S25FL164K	0x4017
+
 /*
  * SST25 chips are SPI, first byte of device ID is memory type, second
  * byte of device ID is related to log(bitsize) at least for some chips.

[Stefan Tauner]

On Sun,  9 Mar 2014 22:20:23 -0400
Nikolay Martynov  wrote:
> Updated according to manufacturers datasheet
> (to the best of my abilities to read it)
> Tested with actual S25FL164K via arduino spi
>
> Signed-off-by: Nikolay Martynov

Hello Nikolay,

thank you very much for the patch; it looks very good on a first
glance. I need to verify it with the datasheet but I have a small
nitpick/question before that: You wrote that you have tested the patch
with the S25FL164K but the .tested field of the respective chip does
not reflect that. May I assume that the .tested field of the S25FL164K
should be set to TEST_OK_PREW?

[Nikolay Martynov]

Hi.

Yes, I was able to flash that this chip on arduino. I was hesitant
to change value of .tested field because my setup was somewhat 'wacky'
- long wires and stuff, and flashing was not very stable. But this
instability was probably due to
my setup, not because of code/arduino/chip, so I guess you can change
it to TEST_OK_PREW.

Thanks.
Nikolay.

2014-05-03 9:00 GMT-04:00 Stefan Tauner :
> On Sun,  9 Mar 2014 22:20:23 -0400
> Nikolay Martynov  wrote:
> > Updated according to manufacturers datasheet
> > (to the best of my abilities to read it)
> > Tested with actual S25FL164K via arduino spi
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Nikolay Martynov
>
> Hello Nikolay,
>
> thank you very much for the patch; it looks very good on a first
> glance. I need to verify it with the datasheet but I have a small
> nitpick/question before that: You wrote that you have tested the patch
> with the S25FL164K but the .tested field of the respective chip does
> not reflect that. May I assume that the .tested field of the S25FL164K
> should be set to TEST_OK_PREW?