[PATCH] mx31pdk: Add NAND support
Fabio Estevam
fabioestevam at yahoo.com
Thu Feb 25 16:59:14 EST 2010
Hi Alberto,
--- On Thu, 2/25/10, Alberto Panizzo <maramaopercheseimorto at gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Alberto Panizzo <maramaopercheseimorto at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] mx31pdk: Add NAND support
> To: "Fabio Estevam" <fabioestevam at yahoo.com>
> Cc: linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org, s.hauer at pengutronix.de
> Date: Thursday, February 25, 2010, 9:12 AM
> Hi Fabio,
>
> On mer, 2010-02-24 at 16:58 -0800, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> > Add NAND support to MX31PDK board.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam at freescale.com>
> > ---
> > arch/arm/mach-mx3/mach-mx31_3ds.c |
> 7 +++++++
> > 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0
> deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-mx3/mach-mx31_3ds.c
> b/arch/arm/mach-mx3/mach-mx31_3ds.c
> > index b88c18a..2d78754 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-mx3/mach-mx31_3ds.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-mx3/mach-mx31_3ds.c
> > @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@
> > #include <mach/board-mx31pdk.h>
> > #include <mach/imx-uart.h>
> > #include <mach/iomux-mx3.h>
> > +#include <mach/mxc_nand.h>
> > #include "devices.h"
> >
> > /*!
> > @@ -80,6 +81,11 @@ static struct resource
> smsc911x_resources[] = {
> > },
> > };
> >
> > +static struct mxc_nand_platform_data
> mx31pdk_nand_board_info = {
> > + .width = 1,
> > + .hw_ecc = 1,
> > +};
> > +
>
> Are you sure that this works? Don't you see a lot of Bad
> blocks reports
> in boot messages?
I followed the same approach used on other i.MX boards. This is what I see:
...
NAND device: Manufacturer ID: 0xec, Chip ID: 0xaa (Samsung NAND 256MiB 1,8V 8-bit)
Scanning device for bad blocks
Bad eraseblock 42 at 0x000000540000
Bad eraseblock 125 at 0x000000fa0000
Bad eraseblock 887 at 0x000006ee0000
Bad eraseblock 1750 at 0x00000dac0000
Bad eraseblock 2046 at 0x00000ffc0000
Bad eraseblock 2047 at 0x00000ffe0000
Registering mxc_nand as whole device
If I define it as:
static struct mxc_nand_platform_data mx31pdk_nand_board_info = {
.width = 1,
.hw_ecc = 1,
.flash_bbt =1,
};
The bad block messages go away.
What would be the correct way?
Thanks,
Fabio Estevam
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list