于 2013年11月27日 19:52, Lee Jones 写道:
However, as we send entire 'message sequences' to the FSM Controller
as opposed to merely OPCODEs we would have to extract the OPCODE from
flash->command[0] and call our own functions to craft the correct
'message sequence' for the task. For this reason we rejected the idea
and went with a stand-alone driver.
could you send me the datasheet of your spi nor controller?
I can change my code if it really not good enough.
we can store the opcode to a field, such as spi_nor_write_op.
The framework which Huang is proposing suffers from the same issues.
Only providing read(), write(), read_reg() and write_reg() doesn't
work for our use-case, as we'd have to decode the flash->command[0] and
invoke our own internal routines as before.
The only framework with would work for us would consist almost all
of the important functions such as; read(), write(), erase(),
wait_busy(), read_jedec(), read_status_reg(), write_status_reg(),
read_control_reg(), write_control_reg(), etc. However, this approach
read_jedec() can be replaced by read_reg(0x9f);
read_status() can be replaced by read_reg(0x5);
....
write_control_reg() can be replaced by write_reg(xx).
Please correct me if i am wrong.
IMHO, the current four hooks for spi-nor{} can do all the things.
read/write/read_reg/write_reg.
thanks
Huang Shijie
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
