lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Mar]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/2] mtd: rawnand: stm32_fmc2: use timings.mode instead of checking tRC_min
From
Hi Miquel,

On 3/28/23 09:56, Miquel Raynal wrote:
> Hi Christophe,
>
> christophe.kerello@foss.st.com wrote on Tue, 28 Mar 2023 09:27:55 +0200:
>
>> Hello Miquel,
>>
>> On 3/27/23 13:06, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/27/23 11:43, Miquel Raynal wrote:
>>>> Hi Tudor,
>>>>
>>>> tudor.ambarus@linaro.org wrote on Mon, 27 Mar 2023 11:30:51 +0100:
>>>>
>>>>> On 3/27/23 10:47, Christophe Kerello wrote:
>>>>>> This patch is using timings.mode value instead of checking tRC_min timing
>>>>>> for EDO mode support.
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>> Fixes and Cc to stable here too, as you'd like to have this backported
>>>>> as well, don't you?
>>>>
>>>> Actually the reason why Christophe split this into two patches is
>>>> because timings.mode was introduced rather lately, he wanted the same
>>>> patch to apply on all stable kernels, he actually asked for that split
>>>> and I agreed (another solution would have been to send this current
>>>> patch to Linus and have the other version sent to stable, but it
>>>> requires a bit of scheduling on both ends).
>>>>
>>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mtd/20230327101156.0ec2816a@xps-13/T/#t
>>>
>>> Right, I understood that from the beginning. If it were to me, I would
>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org #v5.4+ for the first patch and
>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org #v5.10+ for the second.
>>>
>>> So first would be alone just in v5.4, and starting with v5.10 we'll have
>>> both and we'll mimic what we currently have in upstream mainline.
>>>
>>
>> I can send a V3 with cc tag added as per Tudor's suggestion.
>> Or cc tag will be added when the patches will be applied?
>
> I'll handle it, no problem. Is it fine if I send this as part of the
> next merge window or do you expect this fix to be applied earlier? I
> just sent my fixes PR on Monday morning.
>

Yes, it is fine. This patch set can be applied on next merge window.

Regards,
Christophe Kerello.

>>
>> Regards,
>> Christophe Kerello.
>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Christophe Kerello <christophe.kerello@foss.st.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@linaro.org>
>>>>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> drivers/mtd/nand/raw/stm32_fmc2_nand.c | 2 +-
>>>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/stm32_fmc2_nand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/stm32_fmc2_nand.c
>>>>>> index 3abb63d00a0b..9e74bcd90aaa 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/stm32_fmc2_nand.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/stm32_fmc2_nand.c
>>>>>> @@ -1531,7 +1531,7 @@ static int stm32_fmc2_nfc_setup_interface(struct nand_chip *chip, int chipnr,
>>>>>> if (IS_ERR(sdrt))
>>>>>> return PTR_ERR(sdrt);
>>>>>> >>>> - if (sdrt->tRC_min < 30000)
>>>>>> + if (conf->timings.mode > 3)
>>>>>> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>>>>>> >>>> if (chipnr == NAND_DATA_IFACE_CHECK_ONLY)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Miquèl
>
>
> Thanks,
> Miquèl

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-03-28 11:39    [W:0.068 / U:0.172 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site