Re:Re: [PATCH] sf: Querying write-protect status before operating the flash

[chaochao2021666]

HI jagan and ta



I might have a different view， the caller can not get the correct response even 
though we can not
operate the device sucessfully.


I think it is necessary to return a valid value.

if return 0, the device cannot actually be operated but the correct results are 
not possible



BRs
Chao


At 2021-11-06 02:08:04, "Jagan Teki"  wrote:
>On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 10:47 PM  wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 6/22/21 8:21 AM, chao zeng wrote:
>> > From: Chao Zeng 
>> >
>> > When operating the write-protection flash,spi_flash_std_write() and
>> > spi_flash_std_erase() would return wrong result.The flash is protected,
>> > but write or erase the flash would show "OK".
>> >
>> > Check the flash write protection state if the write-protection has enbale
>> > before operating the flash.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Chao Zeng 
>> > ---
>> >
>> >  drivers/mtd/spi/sf_probe.c | 10 ++
>> >  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_probe.c b/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_probe.c
>> > index 3befbe91ca..f06e6b88bd 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_probe.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_probe.c
>> > @@ -109,6 +109,11 @@ static int spi_flash_std_write(struct udevice *dev, 
>> > u32 offset, size_t len,
>> >   struct mtd_info *mtd = &flash->mtd;
>> >   size_t retlen;
>> >
>> > + if (flash->flash_is_locked && flash->flash_is_locked(flash, offset, 
>> > len)) {
>> > + debug("SF: Flash is locked\n");
>> > + return -ENOPROTOOPT;
>>
>> Keep a debug message, but return 0 please. Writes or erases on protected 
>> areas
>> are ignored by the flash, we should reflect that in the code.
>
>Agreed this point, Chao are you fine to do this change while applying it?
>
>Jagan.

Re:Re: [PATCH] sf: Querying write-protect status before operating the flash

[chaochao2021666]

HI Jagan



sorry for the delay response.


And I have checked the maser. There is still a problem with this feature。


reproduce steps:
1. enable the flash protect function
2. using sf cmd to erase the flash. I can get the erase "OK",not the "error".



I think the root cause is that the detection mechanism is missing and to judge 
the permissions of the action

So pull this PR to improve the erase flow


another question:
how can I visit the  u-boot-spi/next? do there any link?





BRs
Chao



At 2021-06-29 21:50:28, "Jagan Teki"  wrote:
>On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 10:51 AM chao zeng  wrote:
>>
>> From: Chao Zeng 
>>
>> When operating the write-protection flash,spi_flash_std_write() and
>> spi_flash_std_erase() would return wrong result.The flash is protected,
>> but write or erase the flash would show "OK".
>>
>> Check the flash write protection state if the write-protection has enbale
>> before operating the flash.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chao Zeng 
>> ---
>
>Does it broken on master? if yes can you check in u-boot-spi/next?
>
>Jagan.