i.MX25 NFC with 8 bit ecc strength
Baruch Siach
baruch at tkos.co.il
Tue Apr 21 01:58:08 PDT 2015
Hi Uwe,
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 09:39:36AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 09:24:28AM +0300, Baruch Siach wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 05:48:18PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > > This is more or less expected. The "more" part is: Matching the hardware
> > > description the (virtual) spare area is sorted into the spare area
> > > buffers, so the first spare area is written to 0xbb001000, the 2nd to
> > > 0xbb001040 etc. (See table 36-3 in the manual.) So probably it's the
> > > driver who doesn't get the sorting right.
> >
> > OK. I see what you mean. The 28 bytes interval has noting to do with hardware.
> > It comes from this line in copy_spare():
> >
> > j = (mtd->oobsize / n >> 1) << 1;
> >
> > In my case oobsize = 224, and n = 8 (512 bytes steps), so j == 28. This means
> > that we must generate nand_ecclayout at run time according to the actual
> > oobsize. This is probably also true for the 4 bit ecc case.
> I think you're only partly right here. The NFC only supports 128 or 218
> bytes spare area for 4k NAND flashes (initialized by BT_SPARE_SIZE). For
> you chip the controller uses the 218 bytes setting, so 26 bytes are read
> for the first 7 oob chunks each (last one: 36) As the driver assumes the
> real oob size of 224 bytes you get that offset of 28 instead.
>
> So looking again on your hexdump:
>
> 00000000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 |................|
> *
> This is the data part, everything in order
>
> 00001000 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff 91 c4 45 be 32 45 6f 5d b1 |.........E.2Eo].|
> 00001010 b1 b9 13 61 59 7d 42 58 eb ff ff ff ff ff ff ff |...aY}BX........|
> Up to the 26th byte --------------------------^^ this is data coming
> from the flash. The following two 0xff are just what happened to be
> written in the NFC buffer. Starting with the four last 0xff in that line
> we have real data again.
>
> 00001020 ff ff ff 91 c4 45 be 32 45 6f 5d b1 b1 b9 13 61 |.....E.2Eo]....a|
> which makes the first ecc byte again the 8th of the oob chunk similar to
> the one above.
Thanks for your explanation.
[...]
> While understanding the problem I produced the following (untested)
> patch:
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand.c
> index dca63a70e783..fc835d352e1c 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand.c
> @@ -807,32 +807,49 @@ static void mxc_nand_select_chip_v2(struct mtd_info *mtd, int chip)
> }
>
> /*
> - * Function to transfer data to/from spare area.
> + * The controller splits a page into data chunks of 512 bytes + partial oob.
> + * There are writesize / 512 such chunks, the size of the partial oob parts is
> + * oobsize / #chunks rounded down to a multiple of 2. The last oob chunk then
> + * contains additionally the byte lost by rounding (if any).
> + * This function handles the needed shuffling between host->data_buf (which
> + * holds a page in natural order, i.e. writesize bytes data + oobsize bytes
> + * spare) and the NFC buffer.
> */
> static void copy_spare(struct mtd_info *mtd, bool bfrom)
> {
> struct nand_chip *this = mtd->priv;
> struct mxc_nand_host *host = this->priv;
> u16 i, j;
> - u16 n = mtd->writesize >> 9;
> +
> + u16 num_chunks = mtd->writesize / 512;
> +
> u8 *d = host->data_buf + mtd->writesize;
> u8 __iomem *s = host->spare0;
> - u16 t = host->devtype_data->spare_len;
> + u16 sparebuf_size = host->devtype_data->spare_len;
>
> - j = (mtd->oobsize / n >> 1) << 1;
> + /* size of oob chunk for all but possibly the last one */
> + oob_chunk_size = (mtd->oobsize / num_chunks >> 1) << 1;
>
> if (bfrom) {
> - for (i = 0; i < n - 1; i++)
> - memcpy32_fromio(d + i * j, s + i * t, j);
> + for (i = 0; i < num_chunks - 1; i++)
> + memcpy32_fromio(d + i * oob_chunk_size,
> + s + i * sparebuf_size,
> + oob_chunk_size);
>
> /* the last section */
> - memcpy32_fromio(d + i * j, s + i * t, mtd->oobsize - i * j);
> + memcpy32_fromio(d + i * oob_chunk_size,
> + s + i * sparebuf_size,
> + mtd->oobsize - i * oob_chunk_size);
> } else {
> - for (i = 0; i < n - 1; i++)
> - memcpy32_toio(&s[i * t], &d[i * j], j);
> + for (i = 0; i < num_chunks - 1; i++)
> + memcpy32_toio(&s[i * sparebuf_size],
> + &d[i * oob_chunk_size],
> + oob_chunk_size);
>
> /* the last section */
> - memcpy32_toio(&s[i * t], &d[i * j], mtd->oobsize - i * j);
> + memcpy32_toio(&s[oob_chunk_size * sparebuf_size],
> + &d[i * oob_chunk_size],
> + mtd->oobsize - i * oob_chunk_size);
> }
> }
>
> What is needed now on top of this (untested and noop) change is to use
> the oob size the controller assumes instead of the real one and somehow
> explain that to the mtd layer and maintainers :-)
Can't we just limit oobsize to 128 or 218? Something like (on top of your
patch):
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand.c
index cc0eb79a177c..ae63f06fe99e 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand.c
@@ -819,7 +819,7 @@ static void copy_spare(struct mtd_info *mtd, bool bfrom)
{
struct nand_chip *this = mtd->priv;
struct mxc_nand_host *host = this->priv;
- u16 i, j;
+ u16 i, oob_chunk_size, used_oobsize;
u16 num_chunks = mtd->writesize / 512;
@@ -828,7 +828,13 @@ static void copy_spare(struct mtd_info *mtd, bool bfrom)
u16 sparebuf_size = host->devtype_data->spare_len;
/* size of oob chunk for all but possibly the last one */
- oob_chunk_size = (mtd->oobsize / num_chunks >> 1) << 1;
+ if (mtd->oobsize >= 218)
+ used_oobsize = 218;
+ else if (mtd->oobsize >= 128)
+ used_oobsize = 128;
+ else
+ used_oobsize = mtd->oobsize;
+ oob_chunk_size = (used_oobsize / num_chunks >> 1) << 1;
if (bfrom) {
for (i = 0; i < num_chunks - 1; i++)
baruch
--
http://baruch.siach.name/blog/ ~. .~ Tk Open Systems
=}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
- baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.2.679.5364, http://www.tkos.co.il -
More information about the linux-mtd
mailing list