[PATCH RESEND] gpmi-nand: Handle ECC Errors in erased pages

[Boris Brezillon]

On Mon, 11 Apr 2016 08:34:35 +0200
Markus Pargmann <mpa at pengutronix.de> wrote:

> Hi Boris,
> 
> On Wednesday 24 February 2016 14:57:50 Boris Brezillon wrote:
> > Hi Markus,
> > 
> > On Sun, 21 Feb 2016 13:52:06 +0100
> > Markus Pargmann <mpa at pengutronix.de> wrote:
> > 
> > > ECC is only calculated for written pages. As erased pages are not
> > > actively written the ECC is always invalid. For this purpose the
> > > Hardware BCH unit is able to check for erased pages and does not raise
> > > an ECC error in this case. This behaviour can be influenced using the
> > > BCH_MODE register which sets the number of allowed bitflips in an erased
> > > page. Unfortunately the unit is not capable of fixing the bitflips in
> > > memory.
> > > 
> > > To avoid complete software checks for erased pages, we can simply check
> > > buffers with uncorrectable ECC errors because we know that any erased
> > > page with errors is uncorrectable by the BCH unit.
> > > 
> > > This patch adds the generic nand_check_erased_ecc_chunk() to gpmi-nand
> > > to correct erased pages. To have the valid data in the buffer before
> > > using them, this patch moves the read_page_swap_end() call before the
> > > ECC status checking for-loop.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Markus Pargmann <mpa at pengutronix.de>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/mtd/nand/gpmi-nand/gpmi-nand.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > >  1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/gpmi-nand/gpmi-nand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/gpmi-nand/gpmi-nand.c
> > > index 235ddcb58f39..ce5a21252102 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/gpmi-nand/gpmi-nand.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/gpmi-nand/gpmi-nand.c
> > > @@ -1035,14 +1035,58 @@ static int gpmi_ecc_read_page(struct mtd_info *mtd, struct nand_chip *chip,
> > >  	/* Loop over status bytes, accumulating ECC status. */
> > >  	status = auxiliary_virt + nfc_geo->auxiliary_status_offset;
> > >  
> > > +	read_page_swap_end(this, buf, nfc_geo->payload_size,
> > > +			   this->payload_virt, this->payload_phys,
> > > +			   nfc_geo->payload_size,
> > > +			   payload_virt, payload_phys);
> > > +
> > >  	for (i = 0; i < nfc_geo->ecc_chunk_count; i++, status++) {
> > >  		if ((*status == STATUS_GOOD) || (*status == STATUS_ERASED))
> > >  			continue;
> > >  
> > >  		if (*status == STATUS_UNCORRECTABLE) {
> > > +			int flips;
> > > +
> > > +			/*
> > > +			 * The ECC hardware has an uncorrectable ECC status
> > > +			 * code in case we have bitflips in an erased page. As
> > > +			 * nothing was written into this subpage the ECC is
> > > +			 * obviously wrong and we can not trust it. We assume
> > > +			 * at this point that we are reading an erased page and
> > > +			 * try to correct the bitflips in buffer up to
> > > +			 * ecc_strength bitflips. If this is a page with random
> > > +			 * data, we exceed this number of bitflips and have a
> > > +			 * ECC failure. Otherwise we use the corrected buffer.
> > > +			 */
> > > +			if (i == 0) {
> > > +				/* The first block includes metadata */
> > > +				flips = nand_check_erased_ecc_chunk(
> > > +						buf + i * nfc_geo->ecc_chunk_size,
> > > +						nfc_geo->ecc_chunk_size,
> > > +						NULL, 0,
> > > +						auxiliary_virt,
> > > +						nfc_geo->metadata_size,
> > > +						nfc_geo->ecc_strength);
> > > +			} else {
> > > +				flips = nand_check_erased_ecc_chunk(
> > > +						buf + i * nfc_geo->ecc_chunk_size,
> > > +						nfc_geo->ecc_chunk_size,
> > > +						NULL, 0,
> > > +						NULL, 0,
> > > +						nfc_geo->ecc_strength);
> > > +			}
> > 
> > You're not checking ECC bytes. I know it's a bit more complicated to
> > implement, but as Brian stated several times, you should always check
> > ECC bytes along with data bytes when testing for an erased chunk.
> > 
> > Indeed, it might appear that the user really programmed ff on the page,
> > and in this case you don't want to consider the page as erased.
> > In this case, the ECC bytes will be different from ff, and you'll
> > be able to identify it by checking those ECC bytes.
> 
> Thanks for the feedback. Talking with a coworker about this we may have found a
> better approach to this that is less complicated to implement. The hardware
> unit allows us to set a bitflip threshold for erased pages. The ECC unit
> creates an ECC error only if the number of bitflips exceeds this threshold, but
> it does not correct these. So the idea is to change the patch so that we set
> pages, that are signaled by the ECC as erased, to 0xff completely without
> checking. So the ECC will do all the work and we completely trust in its
> abilities to do it correctly.

Sounds good.

-- 
Boris Brezillon, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com