[PATCH v2 3/3] mtd: spi-nand: macronix: Add randomizer support

[Miquel Raynal]

On 10/09/2025 at 17:26:13 +08, Cheng Ming Lin <linchengming884 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Miquel,
>
> Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal at bootlin.com> 於 2025年9月10日 週三 下午5:12寫道：
>>
>>
>> > +static int macronix_set_randomizer(struct spinand_device *spinand)
>> > +{
>> > +     struct spi_mem_op exec_op = SPINAND_PROG_EXEC_1S_1S_0_OP(0);
>> > +     struct nand_device *nand = spinand_to_nand(spinand);
>> > +     struct device_node *dn = nanddev_get_of_node(nand);
>> > +     int randopt, ret;
>> > +     u8 cfg, status;
>> > +
>> > +     ret = spinand_read_reg_op(spinand, MACRONIX_FEATURE_ADDR_RANDOMIZER, &cfg);
>> > +     if (ret)
>> > +             return ret;
>> > +     if (cfg)
>> > +             return 0;
>> > +
>> > +     cfg = MACRONIX_CFG_ENPGM | MACRONIX_CFG_RANDEN;
>> > +     randopt = of_property_read_bool(dn, "mxic,randopt");
>>
>> Isn't that a leftover?
>
> The property "mxic,randopt" corresponds to bit2 of the configuration
> register 0x10. Its purpose is to control whether the randomizer also
> covers the initial portion of the spare area.

Do we need a DT property for that?

In any case, it must be declared in the bindings (which I do not think
it is?).

> Since the randomizer feature is only documented in Macronix datasheets,
> it is not clear whether the "randopt" bit is used by all vendors. For
> this reason, the handling is placed inside macronix.c.

Didn't we discuss in the past of a volatile version for SPI NAND
devices? I thought we could use a volatile approach instead.

Thanks,
Miquèl