[PATCH 8/9] mtd: sh_flctl: Use user oob data in hardware ECC mode

[Laurent Pinchart]

Hi Bastian,

On Monday 23 April 2012 11:36:29 Bastian Hecht wrote:
> 2012/4/23 Bastian Hecht <hechtb at googlemail.com>:
> > 2012/4/21 Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart at ideasonboard.com>:
> >> On Friday 20 April 2012 11:13:49 Bastian Hecht wrote:
> >>> In hardware ecc mode, the flctl now writes and reads the oob data
> >>> provided by the user. Additionally the ECC is now returned in normal
> >>> page reads, not only when using the explicit NAND_CMD_READOOB command.
> >> 
> >> For my information again, what's the purpose of returning OOB data if the
> >> caller hasn't requested it ? What are those data then used for ?
> > 
> > There is an active discussion going on whether to pass a boolean to
> > nand_{read,write} that indicates if we need oob data or not. I assume
> > this to make it into the mainline then I can adapt this to the flctl
> > driver. The data can be used by file systems or bad block marking or
> > any other organizational needs like wear leveling and so on.
> 
> I'm unsure if I missed your point here - we just don't know if we need
> it or not. The discussion I mentioned primarily takes place here at
> the mtd mailing list:
> 
> [PATCH 1/2] mtd: nand: add OOB argument to NAND {read,write}_page interfaces
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2012-April/040714.html
> 
> Now I'm confused as well whether I should skip the read oob part of the
> patch. I'll skip the read part of the patch until a decision is made, I
> think.

My point was just that it was pointless to read/write OOB data if the caller 
doesn't use them. It's an optimization: reading OOB data won't hurt regardless 
of what the caller does with it, but it will use CPU time and power for no 
reason. Adding an OOB argument to the {read,write}_page function would make 
this explicit.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart