[PATCH] mtd: OneNAND: Fix wrong subpage_sft at 4KiB pagesize

[Kyungmin Park]

On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 7:06 PM, Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-06-06 at 13:02 +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
>> On Mon, 2011-06-06 at 09:42 +0000, roman.tereshonkov at nokia.com wrote:
>> > What do mean by "no case to use the subpage"?
>> >
>> > According to the spec KFM4G16Q4M-xEBx the Number of Partial Program Cycles in the page (NOP)
>> > is equal to 4 -> subpage_sft=2.

It's really strange. Two OneNAND spec which has 4KiB pagesize say it has 1 NOP.

Number of Partial Program Cycles in the page (Including main and spare
area) NOP - - 1 cycles
(KFM4G16Q5M-xEBx)

that's reason I first set subpage_sft = 0 at original code.

The different thing between you and me is the page architecture
number. yes 4 is the correct number but 5 also has the 4KiB pagesize.
I think it's mean the manufacturing difference. can you check the
which XXnm manufacturing for your devices?
In our case. it's 3Xnm. and previous is 4Xnm.

>>
>> I thought this means "not supported by HW". But if this is supported,
>> then I'm very surprised why would we remove it. I'm dropping this patch
>> from my tree.
>
> OK, I actually did not put it to the l2 tree. And AFAICS this patch
> basically reverts commit 99b17c08bca2810f5910b3027f1b9d82edf7a576, but
> still leaves the data structures like onenand_oob_128.
>
> So NACK for this patch - poor commit message, weird changes. I'm
> surprised to see this from kmpark.

since we got some different OneNAND Spec. even though it has same 4KiB pagesize.

Thank you,
Kyungmin Park
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)
>
>