[PATCH v2 06/35] mtd: spi-nor: manuf-id-collisions: Add support for xt25f128b

[Chris Morgan]

On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 07:51:53AM +0300, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
> Flash does not support continuation codes and may collide with a flash
> of other manufacturer, Intersil being an example .
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus at microchip.com>
> ---
> 0000000 4653 5044 0100 ff01 0000 0901 0030 ff00
> 0000010 000b 0301 0060 ff00 ffff ffff ffff ffff
> 0000020 ffff ffff ffff ffff ffff ffff ffff ffff
> 0000030 20e5 fff1 ffff 07ff eb44 6b08 3b08 bb42
> 0000040 ffee ffff ffff ff00 ffff ff00 200c 520f
> 0000050 d810 ff00 ffff ffff ffff ffff ffff ffff
> 0000060 3600 2700 f99f 6477 e8d9 ffff
> 
>  drivers/mtd/spi-nor/manuf-id-collisions.c | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/manuf-id-collisions.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/manuf-id-collisions.c
> index bf7dba34f018..db31470ebf6a 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/manuf-id-collisions.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/manuf-id-collisions.c
> @@ -13,6 +13,10 @@ static const struct flash_info id_collision_parts[] = {
>  	{ "by25q128as", INFO(0x684018, 0, 64 * 1024, 256, SPI_NOR_SKIP_SFDP |
>  			     SECT_4K | SPI_NOR_DUAL_READ | SPI_NOR_QUAD_READ |
>  			     SPI_NOR_HAS_LOCK | SPI_NOR_HAS_TB) },
> +
> +	/* XTX (XTX Technology Limited) */
> +	{ "xt25f128b", INFO(0x0b4018, 0, 64 * 1024, 256, SPI_NOR_PARSE_SFDP |
> +			    SPI_NOR_HAS_LOCK | SPI_NOR_HAS_TB) },

My apologies for being ignorant of this, but I'm not 100% sure of these
two values (SPI_NOR_HAS_LOCK and SPI_NOR_HAS_TB), even though I
included them in my original commit. Looking at the datasheet for this
I can see that there are 5 block protect bits (BP0 - BP4) corresponding
to status registers SR2 through SR6. Status register bits SR7 and SR8
correspond to "status register protect 0 and status register protect 1"
bits as well. The Rockchip engineer I was testing the SFC with did
not have these flags as well on their driver they were using for this
chip too. I have tested with and without, and they seem to work
regardless. Is there a way to know for sure if these should or should
not be here?

Here is a link to the datasheet I was working off of:
https://datasheet.lcsc.com/szlcsc/2005251034_XTX-XT25F128BSSIGT_C558844.pdf

When this is confirmed I'll be glad to provide my "Tested-by" line.

Thank you.

>  };
>  
>  const struct spi_nor_manufacturer spi_nor_manuf_id_collisions = {
> -- 
> 2.25.1
>