[PATCH] Convert chips to block erasers: Numonyx, PMC, Sanyo, Spansion

[Sean Nelson]

Convert chips to block_erasers:
ST_M25PE10
ST_M25PE20
ST_M25PE40
ST_M25PE80
ST_M25PE16
PMC_25LV010
PMC_25LV016B
PMC_25LV020
PMC_25LV040
PMC_25LV080B
PMC_25LV512
PMC_39F010
PMC_49FL002
PMC_49FL004
SANYO_LE25FW203A
SPANSION_S25FL016A

Added spi_block_erase_d7 for PMC chips.

Signed-off-by: Sean Nelson

[Carl-Daniel Hailfinger]

On 14.01.2010 01:37, Sean Nelson wrote:
> Convert chips to block_erasers:
> ST_M25PE10
> ST_M25PE20
> ST_M25PE40
> ST_M25PE80
> ST_M25PE16
> PMC_25LV010
> PMC_25LV016B
> PMC_25LV020
> PMC_25LV040
> PMC_25LV080B
> PMC_25LV512
> PMC_39F010
> PMC_49FL002
> PMC_49FL004
> SANYO_LE25FW203A
> SPANSION_S25FL016A
>
> Added spi_block_erase_d7 for PMC chips.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sean Nelson

My checker code says:
ERROR: Flash chip S25FL016A erase function 1 region walking resulted in
0x100000 bytes total, expected 0x200000 bytes. Please report a bug at
[e-mail]

Regards,
Carl-Daniel

[Sean Nelson]

Fixed patch and re-diffed against latest svn.

Convert chips to block_erasers:
ST_M25PE10
ST_M25PE20
ST_M25PE40
ST_M25PE80
ST_M25PE16
PMC_25LV010
PMC_25LV016B
PMC_25LV020
PMC_25LV040
PMC_25LV080B
PMC_25LV512
PMC_39F010
PMC_49FL002
PMC_49FL004
SANYO_LE25FW203A
SPANSION_S25FL016A

Added spi_block_erase_d7 for PMC chips.

Signed-off-by: Sean Nelson

[Uwe Hermann]

On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 12:06:02AM -0800, Sean Nelson wrote:
> {
>    	.vendor		= "Numonyx",
>    	.name		= "M25PE40",
>    	.bustype	= CHIP_BUSTYPE_SPI,
>    	.manufacture_id	= ST_ID,
>    	.model_id	= ST_M25PE40,
> .total_size	= 256,
> .total_size	= 512,

Nice catch btw! This was indeed incorrect if I read the datasheet
correctly.
> .page_size	= 256,
> .tested		= TEST_UNTESTED,
> .probe		= probe_spi_rdid,
> .probe_timing	= TIMING_ZERO,
> .erase		= spi_chip_erase_d8,
> .erase		= NULL,
> .block_erasers	=
> {
> 	{
> 		.eraseblocks = { {4 * 1024, 128} },
> 		.block_erase = spi_block_erase_20,
> 	}, {
> 		.eraseblocks = { {64 * 1024, 8} },
> 		.block_erase = spi_block_erase_d8,
> 	}, {
> 		.eraseblocks = { {512 * 1024, 1} },
> 		.block_erase = spi_block_erase_c7,
> 	}
> },

Uwe.

[Carl-Daniel Hailfinger]

On 18.01.2010 09:06, Sean Nelson wrote:
> Fixed patch and re-diffed against latest svn.
>
> Convert chips to block_erasers:
> ST_M25PE10
> ST_M25PE20
> ST_M25PE40
> ST_M25PE80
> ST_M25PE16
> PMC_25LV010
> PMC_25LV016B
> PMC_25LV020
> PMC_25LV040
> PMC_25LV080B
> PMC_25LV512
> PMC_39F010
> PMC_49FL002
> PMC_49FL004
> SANYO_LE25FW203A
> SPANSION_S25FL016A
>
> Added spi_block_erase_d7 for PMC chips.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sean Nelson

Acked-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger

Two minor comments (not blocking the commit in any way).
> .vendor		= "PMC",
> .name		= "Pm49FL002",
> .bustype	= CHIP_BUSTYPE_LPC|CHIP_BUSTYPE_FWH, /* A/A Mux*/
> .manufacture_id	= PMC_ID_NOPREFIX,
> .model_id	= PMC_49FL002,
> .total_size	= 256,
> .page_size	= 16 * 1024,
> .feature_bits	= FEATURE_REGISTERMAP,
> .tested		= TEST_OK_PREW,
> .tested		= TEST_OK_PRW,
> .probe		= probe_jedec,
> .probe_timing	= TIMING_ZERO,	/* routine is wrapper to probe_jedec (pm49fl00x.c) */
> .erase		= erase_49fl00x,
> .erase		= NULL, /* Was: erase_49fl00x */

I don't get the point of this comment. Is it because the original
function messes with the locking regs and the new function doesn't?
> .vendor		= "PMC",
> .name		= "Pm49FL004",
> .bustype	= CHIP_BUSTYPE_LPC|CHIP_BUSTYPE_FWH, /* A/A Mux*/
> .manufacture_id	= PMC_ID_NOPREFIX,
> .model_id	= PMC_49FL004,
> .total_size	= 512,
> .page_size	= 64 * 1024,
> .feature_bits	= FEATURE_REGISTERMAP,
> .tested		= TEST_OK_PREW,
> .tested		= TEST_OK_PRW,
> .probe		= probe_jedec,
> .probe_timing	= TIMING_ZERO,	/* routine is wrapper to probe_jedec (pm49fl00x.c) */
> .erase		= erase_49fl00x,
> .erase		= NULL, /* Was: erase_49fl00x */

Same here.

Regards,
Carl-Daniel

[Sean Nelson]

On 1/18/10 6:13 PM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
> Acked-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger

Thanks, committed in r867.