Hi, > -----Original Message----- > From: Marek Vasut <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2024 7:49 PM > To: Abbarapu, Venkatesh <[email protected]>; [email protected] > Cc: Andre Przywara <[email protected]>; Ashok Reddy Soma > <[email protected]>; Jagan Teki <[email protected]>; > Michael Walle <[email protected]>; Simek, Michal <[email protected]>; > Patrice Chotard <[email protected]>; Patrick Delaunay > <[email protected]>; Pratyush Yadav <[email protected]>; Quentin > Schulz <[email protected]>; Sean Anderson <[email protected]>; > Simon Glass <[email protected]>; Takahiro Kuwano > <[email protected]>; Tom Rini <[email protected]>; Tudor > Ambarus <[email protected]>; uboot-stm32@st-md- > mailman.stormreply.com > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] Revert "spi: zynq_qspi: Add parallel memories > support in > QSPI driver" > > On 10/23/24 4:14 PM, Abbarapu, Venkatesh wrote: > > Hi, > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Marek Vasut <[email protected]> > >> Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2024 6:15 PM > >> To: Abbarapu, Venkatesh <[email protected]>; > >> [email protected] > >> Cc: Andre Przywara <[email protected]>; Ashok Reddy Soma > >> <[email protected]>; Jagan Teki <[email protected]>; > >> Michael Walle <[email protected]>; Simek, Michal > >> <[email protected]>; Patrice Chotard > >> <[email protected]>; Patrick Delaunay > >> <[email protected]>; Pratyush Yadav <[email protected]>; > >> Quentin Schulz <[email protected]>; Sean Anderson > >> <[email protected]>; Simon Glass <[email protected]>; Takahiro Kuwano > >> <[email protected]>; Tom Rini <[email protected]>; Tudor > >> Ambarus <[email protected]>; uboot-stm32@st-md- > >> mailman.stormreply.com > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] Revert "spi: zynq_qspi: Add parallel > >> memories support in QSPI driver" > >> > >> On 10/23/24 11:07 AM, Abbarapu, Venkatesh wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> Tested with the non-stacked default single configuration on ZynqMP > >>> zcu102 board > >> and didn’t see any issue. > >>> > >>> ZynqMP> sf probe 0 0 0 > >>> SF: Detected mt25qu512a with page size 256 Bytes, erase size 64 KiB, > >>> total 64 MiB > >>> ZynqMP> sf erase 0x0 0x4000000;mw.b 0x8000 aabbccdd 0x4000000;sf > >>> ZynqMP> write > >>> ZynqMP> 0x8000 0x0 0x4000000;mw.b 0x8008000 0x0 0x4000000;sf read > >>> ZynqMP> 0x8008000 0x0 0x4000000;cmp.b 0x8000 0x8008000 0x4000000 > >>> SF: 67108864 bytes @ 0x0 Erased: OK > >>> device 0 whole chip > >>> SF: 67108864 bytes @ 0x0 Written: OK device 0 whole chip > >>> SF: 67108864 bytes @ 0x0 Read: OK > >>> Total of 67108864 byte(s) were the same > >>> > >>> Thanks > >>> Venkatesh > >>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: Marek Vasut <[email protected]> > >>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2024 2:12 PM > >>>> To: Abbarapu, Venkatesh <[email protected]>; Marek Vasut > >>>> <[email protected]>; [email protected] > >>>> Cc: Andre Przywara <[email protected]>; Ashok Reddy Soma > >>>> <[email protected]>; Jagan Teki > >>>> <[email protected]>; Michael Walle <[email protected]>; > >>>> Simek, Michal <[email protected]>; Patrice Chotard > >>>> <[email protected]>; Patrick Delaunay > >>>> <[email protected]>; Pratyush Yadav <[email protected]>; > >>>> Quentin Schulz <[email protected]>; Sean Anderson > >>>> <[email protected]>; Simon Glass <[email protected]>; Takahiro > >>>> Kuwano <[email protected]>; Tom Rini > >>>> <[email protected]>; Tudor Ambarus <[email protected]>; > >>>> uboot-stm32@st-md- mailman.stormreply.com > >>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] Revert "spi: zynq_qspi: Add parallel > >>>> memories support in QSPI driver" > >>>> > >>>> On 10/23/24 5:18 AM, Abbarapu, Venkatesh wrote: > >>>>> Hi Marek, > >>>>> There was some issue and fix is sent > >>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/20241018082644.22495-1-venkatesh.ab > >>>>> ba > >>>>> ra > >>>>> [email protected]/T/#u > >>>> > >>>> Is this one fix or three fixes for three different issues ? > >>>> > >>>> This seems to fix READ errors, which is apparently another error > >>>> introduced by this stuff. In my case, plain and simply 'sf probe ; > >>>> sf update' combination with single non- stacked SPI NOR does not > >>>> work. Was such > >> a simple configuration ever tested ? > >>>> > >>>>> Not sure we need to revert whole parallel/stacked support? > >>>> Please stop top-posting. > >> > >> You ran completely different test on completely different chip. > >> > >> Stop top posting. > > > > Sorry for top posting > > > > Will try to get the spansion flash part and try the below tests. > > At this point tried testing on different board with different flash part. > > > > Zynq> sf probe 0 0 0 > > SF: Detected mx66l1g45g with page size 256 Bytes, erase size 64 KiB, > > total 128 MiB > > Zynq> sf update 0x4000000 0 0x160000 > > device 0 offset 0x0, size 0x160000 > > 1441792 bytes written, 0 bytes skipped in 5.735s, speed 257435 B/s > > > > Zynq> sf erase 0x0 0x4000000;mw.b 0x8000 aabbccdd 0x4000000;sf write > > Zynq> 0x8000 0x0 0x4000000;mw.b 0x8008000 0x0 0x4000000;sf read > > Zynq> 0x8008000 0x0 0x4000000;cmp.b 0x8000 0x8008000 0x4000000 > > SF: 67108864 bytes @ 0x0 Erased: OK > > device 0 offset 0x0, size 0x4000000 > > SF: 67108864 bytes @ 0x0 Written: OK > > device 0 offset 0x0, size 0x4000000 > > SF: 67108864 bytes @ 0x0 Read: OK > > Total of 67108864 byte(s) were the same > Commit message reads: > > " > this no longer works: > > => sf probe && sf update 0x50000000 0 0x160000 > SF: Detected s25fs512s with page size 256 Bytes, erase size 256 KiB, total 64 > MiB > device 0 offset 0x0, size 0x160000 SPI flash failed in read step " > > You ran completely different test on completely different chip. > > The test is "sf probe && sf update 0x50000000 0 0x160000" , did you ever test > "sf > update" ?
Tried the test " sf probe && sf update 0x4000000 0 0x160000" Zynq> sf probe && sf update 0x4000000 0 0x160000 SF: Detected mx66l1g45g with page size 256 Bytes, erase size 64 KiB, total 128 MiB device 0 offset 0x0, size 0x160000 0 bytes written, 1441792 bytes skipped in 0.154s, speed 9586980 B/s Zynq> Thanks Venkatesh
