[PATCH v2] mtd/spi-nor: Add SPI memory controllers for Aspeed SoCs

[Marek Vasut]

On 11/25/2016 04:01 PM, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> Hello Marek,

Hi!

> Sorry for the late answer. Here are a couple of answers to the naming 
> problem 
> 
> On 11/25/2016 02:57 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 11/21/2016 05:45 AM, Joel Stanley wrote:
>>> Hello Marek,
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>>> Thank you for the review. I have answered a few of your questions;
>>> I'll leave the rest to Cedric.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 8:13 AM, Marek Vasut <marek.vasut at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/Kconfig b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/Kconfig
>>>>> index 4a682ee0f632..96148600fdab 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/Kconfig
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/Kconfig
>>>>> @@ -76,4 +76,16 @@ config SPI_NXP_SPIFI
>>>>>         Flash. Enable this option if you have a device with a SPIFI
>>>>>         controller and want to access the Flash as a mtd device.
>>>>>
>>>>> +config ASPEED_FLASH_SPI
>>>>
>>>> Should be SPI_ASPEED , see the other controllers and keep the list sorted.
>>>
>>> Perhaps SPI_NOR_ASPEED so it's clear it's not a driver for a generic SPI bus?
>>
>> But it's not a driver for SPI-NOR only either, it seems it's a driver
>> for multiple distinct devices.
> 
> yes and I think it was a mistake to send the whole at once. We have 
> added the support in qemu controller by controller and it was easier 
> to understand. I need to split the patchset in the next version. 

Cool :-)

>>>>> +     tristate "Aspeed flash controllers in SPI mode"
>>>>> +     depends on HAS_IOMEM && OF
>>>>> +     depends on ARCH_ASPEED || COMPILE_TEST
>>>>> +     # IO_SPACE_LIMIT must be equivalent to (~0UL)
>>>>> +     depends on !NEED_MACH_IO_H
>>>>
>>>> Why?
>>>>
>>>>> +     help
>>>>> +       This enables support for the New Static Memory Controller
>>>>> +       (FMC) in the Aspeed SoCs (AST2400 and AST2500) when attached
>>>>> +       to SPI nor chips, and support for the SPI Memory controller
>>>>> +       (SPI) for the BIOS.
>>>>
>>>> I think there is a naming chaos between FMC, SMC (as in Static MC) and
>>>> SMC (as in SPI MC).
>>>
>>> Yes, you're spot on. This naming chaos comes form the vendor's documentation.
>>>
>>> I think we could re-work this sentence to make it clearer.
>>
>> Please do before someone's head explodes from this :)
> 
> Indeed .. :) I will give a try. Here is the status :
> 
> Aspeed SoC AST2400 has a set of SMC (Static Memory Controller) 
> controllers in which you find :
> 
> - Legacy Static Memory Controller (called SMC in the spec)  
>   . base address at 0x16000000
>   . BMC firmware
>   . old register set
>   . supports NOR flash, NAND flash and SPI flash memory. All bootable.
>   . 1 chip select pin (CE0)
> 
> - New Static Memory Controller (called FMC in the spec)
>   . base address at 0x16200000
>   . BMC firmware
>   . new register set
>   . supports NOR flash, NAND flash and SPI flash memory. 
>   . 5 chip select pins (CE0 ∼ CE4)
> 
> - SPI Flash Controller (called SPI in the spec)  
>   . base address at 0x16300000
>   . host Firmware
>   . exotic register set, between old and new ...
>   . supports SPI flash memory
>   . 1 chip select pin (CE0)

This should be (except for the base address) be in some documentation,
it helps.

> Aspeed SoC AST2500 defines has a similar set of SMC (Static Memory 
> Controller) controllers, more in the vein of the AST2400 FMC  :
> 
> - Legacy Static Memory Controller is gone, NOR and NAND support also
> 
> - Firmware SPI Memory Controller (called FMC in the spec)  
>   . base address at 0x16200000
>   . BMC firmware
>   . new register set
>   . supports SPI flash memory.
>   . 3 chip select pins (CE0 ~ CE2)
> 
> - SPI Flash Controller (called SPI1 in the spec) first
>   . base address at 0x16300000
>   . host firmware
>   . new register set
>   . supports SPI flash memory.
>   . 2 chip select pins (CE0 ~ CE1)
> 
> - SPI Flash Controller (called SPI2 in the spec) second
>   . base address at 0x16310000
>   . host firmware
>   . new register set
>   . supports SPI flash memory.
>   . 2 chip select pins (CE0 ~ CE1)
> 
> 
> So, these are the reasons behind the naming mess. Added to that the 
> driver considers the acronym SMC to stand for SPI Memory Controller, 
> which is wrong. I tried to reduce the confusion with some comments but 
> that was a failure :)

The explanation above is awesome though.

> In qemu, we have used FMC (Firmware ...) and SPI to name the controllers 
> and we just dropped the legacy SMC. I think using the same naming scheme
> is a good idea. We don't support anything else than SPI either so we can 
> drop the other types for the moment.

One thing which I still ponder about is how do you support those
controllers which support NOR and NAND flash and SPI, do you tap
into all subsystems ?

>>>>> +static int aspeed_smc_read_from_ahb(void *buf, const void __iomem *src,
>>>>> +                                 size_t len)
>>>>> +{
>>>>
>>>> What if start of buf is unaligned ?
>>>>
>>>>> +     if ((((unsigned long)src | (unsigned long)buf | len) & 3) == 0) {
>>>>
>>>> Uh, should use boolean OR, not bitwise or. Also, if you're testing
>>>> pointer for NULL, do if (!ptr) .
>>>>
>>>> if (!src || !buf || !len)
>>>>    return;
>>>
>>> That's a different test. We're testing here that the buffers are
>>> aligned to see if we can do a word-at-a-time copy.
>>>
>>> If not, it falls through to do a byte-at-a-time copy. I think this
>>> covers your first question about buf being unaligned.
>>
>> Ah, I see, thanks for clarifying. Comment in the code would be helpful
>> for why what you're doing is OK. And I think you want to cast to
>> uintptr_t instead to make this work on 64bit.
> 
> yes
> 
>>> Cedric, perhaps you could create a macro called IS_ALLIGNED to make it
>>> clear what this is doing?
>>
>> Yup, thanks!
> 
> sure. I still need to go through Marek's comments in the initial email, 
> I will split the pachset and fix the naming in next version.

Thanks!

-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut