state of support for "external ECC hardware"

Christopher Harvey charvey at
Thu Nov 8 14:22:50 EST 2012

On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 07:59:42PM +0100, Ivan Djelic wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 03:21:25PM +0000, Christopher Harvey wrote:
> (...) 
> > We had BCH8 code running, but it wasn't enough. The main reason we
> > switched away from host side ECC was because we were getting bitflips
> > within the ECC codeword data itself.
> But the ECC bytes are part of the BCH codeword, therefore I don't understand
> what the issue could be ? Are you sure bitflips were not in some unprotected
> OOB area ?

Ok, the ECC bytes I had were stored in the OOB area and were
unprotected. Any bit flips in the OOB area was a disaster. This was
coming from a heavily modified forked kernel that had BCH8 bugs in the
past. For example, I had to fix this one before the patch came out:;a=commitdiff;h=adc46d691d745604da1197d154fe712e10ec468d;hp=9e78267ed6302537474489e88bd59827315db15b
I can't explain why this implementation fails on ECC byte corruption.


More information about the linux-mtd mailing list