mail archive of the barebox mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrey Smirnov <andrew.smirnov@gmail.com>
To: barebox@lists.infradead.org
Cc: Andrey Smirnov <andrew.smirnov@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH 13/20] e1000: Fix a bug in e1000_probe()
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2016 19:52:34 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1453089161-6697-13-git-send-email-andrew.smirnov@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1453089161-6697-1-git-send-email-andrew.smirnov@gmail.com>

There are several reasons why that code in e1000_probe had to be
changed:

 - It reads from chip variant specific register (present only on
   i210) in a chip variant agnostic codepath

 - It makes no sense to check for FLUPD bit to make a decision weither
   to validate EEPROM or not since its function per datasheet is:

   " ... Flash Update.

     Writing 1b to this bit causes the content of the internal 4 KB
     shadow RAM to be written into one of the first two 4 KB sectors
     of the Flash device (Sector 0 or Sector 1). The bit is
     self-cleared immediately... "

   and it is only through sheer serendipity the defined value for
   bitmask for FLUPD is equivalent to bitmask for FLASH_DETECTED bit
   which is the bit we actually care about and need to test against
   (FLUPD for i210 has a different bitmask)

Fix those problems by replacing the i210 specific check inside of
e1000_validate_eeprom_checksum() with a chip agnostic one and using
correct bitmask.

Signed-off-by: Andrey Smirnov <andrew.smirnov@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/net/e1000/e1000.h  |  1 +
 drivers/net/e1000/eeprom.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++--
 drivers/net/e1000/main.c   |  3 +--
 3 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/e1000/e1000.h b/drivers/net/e1000/e1000.h
index 8ec45a7..92e2100 100644
--- a/drivers/net/e1000/e1000.h
+++ b/drivers/net/e1000/e1000.h
@@ -800,6 +800,7 @@ struct e1000_eeprom_info {
 #define E1000_EECD_SELSHAD   0x00020000 /* Select Shadow RAM */
 #define E1000_EECD_INITSRAM  0x00040000 /* Initialize Shadow RAM */
 #define E1000_EECD_FLUPD     0x00080000 /* Update FLASH */
+#define E1000_EECD_I210_FLASH_DETECTED	(1 << 19) /* FLASH detected */
 #define E1000_EECD_AUPDEN    0x00100000 /* Enable Autonomous FLASH update */
 #define E1000_EECD_SHADV     0x00200000 /* Shadow RAM Data Valid */
 #define E1000_EECD_SEC1VAL   0x00400000 /* Sector One Valid */
diff --git a/drivers/net/e1000/eeprom.c b/drivers/net/e1000/eeprom.c
index 87ea82f..4a1c7e6 100644
--- a/drivers/net/e1000/eeprom.c
+++ b/drivers/net/e1000/eeprom.c
@@ -359,8 +359,13 @@ int32_t e1000_init_eeprom_params(struct e1000_hw *hw)
 		eeprom->use_eerd = true;
 		break;
 	case e1000_igb:
-		/* i210 has 4k of iNVM mapped as EEPROM */
-		eeprom->type = e1000_eeprom_invm;
+		if (eecd & E1000_EECD_I210_FLASH_DETECTED) {
+			eeprom->type = e1000_eeprom_flash;
+			eeprom->word_size = 2048;
+		} else {
+			eeprom->type = e1000_eeprom_invm;
+		}
+
 		eeprom->use_eerd = true;
 		break;
 	default:
@@ -661,6 +666,15 @@ int e1000_validate_eeprom_checksum(struct e1000_hw *hw)

 	DEBUGFUNC();

+	/*
+	  Only the following three 'types' of EEPROM can be expected
+	  to have correct EEPROM checksum
+	*/
+	if (hw->eeprom.type != e1000_eeprom_spi &&
+	    hw->eeprom.type != e1000_eeprom_microwire &&
+	    hw->eeprom.type != e1000_eeprom_flash)
+		return 0;
+
 	/* Read the EEPROM */
 	if (e1000_read_eeprom(hw, 0, EEPROM_CHECKSUM_REG + 1, buf) < 0) {
 		dev_err(&hw->edev.dev, "Unable to read EEPROM!\n");
diff --git a/drivers/net/e1000/main.c b/drivers/net/e1000/main.c
index 9791b60..4518be8 100644
--- a/drivers/net/e1000/main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/e1000/main.c
@@ -3558,8 +3558,7 @@ static int e1000_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct pci_device_id *id)
 		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "EEPROM is invalid!\n");
 		return -EINVAL;
 	}
-	if ((E1000_READ_REG(hw, EECD) & E1000_EECD_FLUPD) &&
-	    e1000_validate_eeprom_checksum(hw))
+	if (e1000_validate_eeprom_checksum(hw))
 		return -EINVAL;

 	e1000_get_ethaddr(edev, edev->ethaddr);
--
2.5.0

_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-01-18  3:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <1453089161-6697-1-git-send-email-andrew.smirnov@gmail.com>
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 02/20] e1000: Fix a bug in e1000_detect_gig_phy Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 03/20] e1000: Remove unnecessary variable Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 04/20] e1000: Do not read same register twice Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 05/20] e1000: Remove unneeded i210 specific register code Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 06/20] e1000: Consolidate register offset fixups Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 07/20] e1000: Remove 'use_eewr' parameter Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 08/20] e1000: Remove 'page_size' Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 09/20] e1000: Simplify EEPROM init for e1000_80003es2lan Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 10/20] e1000: Simplify EEPROM init for e1000_igb Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 11/20] e1000: Consolidate SPI EEPROM init code Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 12/20] e1000: Consolidate Microwire " Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` Andrey Smirnov [this message]
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 14/20] e1000: Remove unnecessary intialization Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 15/20] e1000: Refactor Flash/EEPROM reading code Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 16/20] e1000: Add functions for register polling Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-19  8:21   ` Sascha Hauer
2016-01-19 18:53     ` Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-20  7:32       ` Sascha Hauer
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 17/20] e1000: Properly release SW_FW_SYNC semaphore bits Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 18/20] e1000: Add EEPROM access locking for i210 Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 19/20] e1000: Expose i210's external flash as MTD Andrey Smirnov
2016-01-18  3:52 ` [PATCH 20/20] e1000: Expose i210's iNVM as a cdev Andrey Smirnov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1453089161-6697-13-git-send-email-andrew.smirnov@gmail.com \
    --to=andrew.smirnov@gmail.com \
    --cc=barebox@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox