On Sat, Dec 09, 2023 at 10:02:09PM +0100, Dragan Simic wrote: > On 2023-12-09 21:43, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 09, 2023 at 09:37:28PM +0100, Dragan Simic wrote: > > > On 2023-12-09 21:34, Tom Rini wrote: > > > > On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 04:24:43PM +0000, Andre Przywara wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 00:59:52 +0000 > > > > > Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > Add support for the zBIT ZB25VQ128 (128M-bit) SPI NOR flash memory > > > > > > chip, > > > > > > as used on the Xunlong Orange Pi Zero 3 board. > > > > > > > > > > does anyone have any objections against this patch? I wanted to take > > > > > this > > > > > via the sunxi tree, as this blocks some board support patches. > > > > > > > > > > IIUC Linux gave up on adding rather generic entries up for each and > > > > > every > > > > > SPI NOR chip, if there is nothing special about them: > > > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=773bbe1044 > > > > > Should we follow suit here? > > > > > > > > And we could then start trimming the table we do have as well, to > > > > reclaim space? > > > > > > In general, yes, but we'd also need to consume a bit more space with > > > the > > > additional auto-detection logic. > > > > Maybe part one of the series is backport that logic, part two is remove > > all the easy to remove tables? Or at least a number of them so the > > series is a wash and then a targeted series of drop-an-entry and cc the > > person that added it so they can run-time verify it's still fine? > > Sounds like a plan to me and I'm willing to work on that. Though, I think > we'll inevitably end up with increasing the resulting image sizes a bit, but > that might be an acceptable trade-off for making supporting more SPI chips > and more new boards much easier in the future.
Yeah, this is where we need to go overall long term if nothing else. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
