raw/omap2: erasing issue
Yegor Yefremov
yegorslists at googlemail.com
Mon Jul 4 03:31:56 PDT 2022
Hi Roger,
On Mon, Jul 4, 2022 at 12:28 PM Roger Quadros <rogerq at kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Hello Yegor,
>
> On 04/07/2022 14:28, Yegor Yefremov wrote:
> > Hi Roger,
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 1:22 PM Roger Quadros <rogerq at kernel.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Yegor,
> >>
> >> On 29/06/2022 17:23, Yegor Yefremov wrote:
> >>> Hi Roger,
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 3:44 PM Roger Quadros <rogerq at kernel.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Yegor,
> >>>>
> >>>> On 29/06/2022 14:33, Roger Quadros wrote:
> >>>>> Hi Yegor,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 28/06/2022 14:59, Yegor Yefremov wrote:
> >>>>>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 1:57 PM Yegor Yefremov
> >>>>>> <yegorslists at googlemail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi Roger,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 1:44 PM Roger Quadros <rogerq at kernel.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hi Yegor,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 28/06/2022 13:48, Yegor Yefremov wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Since linux 5.17 I get the following issue when doing ubiformat:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> # ubiformat -y /dev/mtd5
> >>>>>>>>> ubiformat: mtd5 (nand), size 265945088 bytes (253.6 MiB), 2029
> >>>>>>>>> eraseblocks of 131072 bytes (128.0 KiB), min. I/O size 2048 bytes
> >>>>>>>>> libscan: scanning eraseblock 1097 -- 54 % complete eth1 timed out to bring up
> >>>>>>>>> libscan: scanning eraseblock 2028 -- 100 % complete
> >>>>>>>>> ubiformat: 2001 eraseblocks have valid erase counter, mean value is 9
> >>>>>>>>> ubiformat: 2 eraseblocks are supposedly empty
> >>>>>>>>> ubiformat: 26 bad eraseblocks found, numbers: 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10,
> >>>>>>>>> 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30,
> >>>>>>>>> 31, 32
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I'm guessing these bad blocks recently added due to the offending patch?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Yes.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> ubiformat: formatting eras[ 33.644323] nand: nand_erase_nand:
> >>>>>>>>> attempt to erase a bad block at page 0x00000d40
> >>>>>>>>> ubiformat: formatting eraseblock 28[ 33.658809] nand:
> >>>>>>>>> nand_erase_nand: attempt to erase a bad block at page 0x00000d80
> >>>>>>>>> ubiformat: formatting eraseblock 29 -- 1 % [ 33.674531] nand:
> >>>>>>>>> nand_erase_nand: attempt to erase a bad block at page 0x00000dc0
> >>>>>>>>> ubiformat: formatting eraseblock 30 -- 1 % complete [ 33.684508]
> >>>>>>>>> nand: nand_erase_nand: attempt to erase a bad block at page 0x00000e00
> >>>>>>>>> ubiformat: formatting eraseblock 34 -- 1 % complete libmtd: error!:
> >>>>>>>>> MEMERASE64 ioctl failed for eraseblock 34 (mtd5)
> >>>>>>>>> error 5 (Input/output error)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> ubiformat: error!: failed to erase eraseblock 34
> >>>>>>>>> error 5 (Input/output error)
> >>>>>>>>> ubiformat: marking block 34 bad
> >>>>>>>>> ubiformat: formatting eraseblock 35 -- 1 % complete libmtd: error!:
> >>>>>>>>> MEMERASE64 ioctl failed for eraseblock 35 (mtd5)
> >>>>>>>>> error 5 (Input/output error)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> ubiformat: error!: failed to erase eraseblock 35
> >>>>>>>>> error 5 (Input/output error)
> >>>>>>>>> ubiformat: marking block 35 bad
> >>>>>>>>> ubiformat: formatting eraseblock 36 -- 1 % complete libmtd: error!:
> >>>>>>>>> MEMERASE64 ioctl failed for eraseblock 36 (mtd5)
> >>>>>>>>> error 5 (Input/output error)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> ubiformat: error!: failed to erase eraseblock 36
> >>>>>>>>> error 5 (Input/output error)
> >>>>>>>>> ubiformat: marking block 36 bad
> >>>>>>>>> ubiformat: formatting eraseblock 37 -- 1 % complete libmtd: error!:
> >>>>>>>>> MEMERASE64 ioctl failed for eraseblock 37 (mtd5)
> >>>>>>>>> error 5 (Input/output error)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> ubiformat: error!: failed to erase eraseblock 37
> >>>>>>>>> error 5 (Input/output error)
> >>>>>>>>> ubiformat: marking block 37 bad
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> ubiformat: error!: consecutive bad blocks exceed limit: 4, bad flash?
> >>>>>>>>> # [ 36.322563] vwl1271: disabling
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> git bisect pointed to the following commit:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> a9e849efca4f9c7732ea4a81f13ec96208994b22 is the first bad commit
> >>>>>>>>> commit a9e849efca4f9c7732ea4a81f13ec96208994b22
> >>>>>>>>> Author: Roger Quadros <rogerq at kernel.org>
> >>>>>>>>> Date: Thu Dec 9 11:04:55 2021 +0200
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> mtd: rawnand: omap2: move to exec_op interface
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Stop using legacy interface and move to the exec_op interface.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Roger Quadros <rogerq at kernel.org>
> >>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal at bootlin.com>
> >>>>>>>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mtd/20211209090458.24830-4-rogerq@kernel.org
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> :040000 040000 2341051b8aa8e6b554b8a44d2934f76d1aa460c4
> >>>>>>>>> c1727080ff16c403f4ad5ed840acc90127b632f8 M drivers
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Info to my NAND flash:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> [ 5.695760] nand: device found, Manufacturer ID: 0x2c, Chip ID: 0xda
> >>>>>>>>> [ 5.702193] nand: Micron MT29F2G08ABAEAWP
> >>>>>>>>> [ 5.706356] nand: 256 MiB, SLC, erase size: 128 KiB, page size:
> >>>>>>>>> 2048, OOB size: 64
> >>>>>>>>> [ 5.714204] nand: using OMAP_ECC_BCH8_CODE_HW ECC scheme
> >>>>>>>>> [ 5.719673] 6 cmdlinepart partitions found on MTD device omap2-nand.0
> >>>>>>>>> [ 5.726232] Creating 6 MTD partitions on "omap2-nand.0":
> >>>>>>>>> [ 5.731594] 0x000000000000-0x000000020000 : "SPL"
> >>>>>>>>> [ 5.737788] mtdblock: MTD device 'SPL' is NAND, please consider
> >>>>>>>>> using UBI block devices instead.
> >>>>>>>>> [ 5.750113] 0x000000020000-0x000000040000 : "SPL.backup1"
> >>>>>>>>> [ 5.756916] mtdblock: MTD device 'SPL.backup1' is NAND, please
> >>>>>>>>> consider using UBI block devices instead.
> >>>>>>>>> [ 5.769870] 0x000000040000-0x000000060000 : "SPL.backup2"
> >>>>>>>>> [ 5.776695] mtdblock: MTD device 'SPL.backup2' is NAND, please
> >>>>>>>>> consider using UBI block devices instead.
> >>>>>>>>> [ 5.789559] 0x000000060000-0x000000080000 : "SPL.backup3"
> >>>>>>>>> [ 5.796423] mtdblock: MTD device 'SPL.backup3' is NAND, please
> >>>>>>>>> consider using UBI block devices instead.
> >>>>>>>>> [ 5.809341] 0x000000080000-0x000000260000 : "u-boot"
> >>>>>>>>> [ 5.816652] mtdblock: MTD device 'u-boot' is NAND, please consider
> >>>>>>>>> using UBI block devices instead.
> >>>>>>>>> [ 5.829189] 0x000000260000-0x000010000000 : "UBI"
> >>>>>>>>> [ 5.971508] mtdblock: MTD device 'UBI' is NAND, please consider
> >>>>>>>>> using UBI block devices instead.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> What platform are you on?
> >>>>>>>> I do remember testing this on omap3-beagle but it does not use BCH8 ECC scheme.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I am on am335x [1]
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch/arm/boot/dts/am335x-baltos-ir5221.dts?h=v5.19-rc4
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> NAND node definition [1]:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> &gpmc {
> >>>>>> pinctrl-names = "default";
> >>>>>> pinctrl-0 = <&nandflash_pins_s0>;
> >>>>>> ranges = <0 0 0x08000000 0x10000000>; /* CS0: NAND */
> >>>>>> status = "okay";
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> nand at 0,0 {
> >>>>>> compatible = "ti,omap2-nand";
> >>>>>> reg = <0 0 4>; /* CS0, offset 0, IO size 4 */
> >>>>>> interrupt-parent = <&gpmc>;
> >>>>>> interrupts = <0 IRQ_TYPE_NONE>, /* fifoevent */
> >>>>>> <1 IRQ_TYPE_NONE>; /* termcount */
> >>>>>> rb-gpios = <&gpmc 0 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; /* gpmc_wait0 */
> >>>>>> nand-bus-width = <8>;
> >>>>>> ti,nand-ecc-opt = "bch8";
> >>>>>> ti,nand-xfer-type = "polled";
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Could you please change this to "prefetch-polled" and see if it fixes the issue?
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I tried to set ti,nand-xfer-type to "polled" on beagle-c4 board and could not reproduce the issue
> >>>> I will need your help please to debug this issue.
> >>>>
> >>>> Could you please apply the below patch on top of commit a9e849efca4f9c7732ea4a81f13ec96208994b22
> >>>> and send me the full kernel log and output of ubiformat command?
> >>>
> >>> I'll post the data later.
> >>>
> >>> The test with the "prefetch-polled" setting looks promising:
> >>>
> >>> 1. ubiformat runs without issues
> >>> 2. I can boot from NAND after "cat MLO > /dev/mtdblock0", etc.
> >>> 3. the kernel can mount UBIFS as rootfs
> >>>
> >>> The only issue I have for now, is that barebox fails to correctly
> >>> mount the first partition (the second with UBIFS rootfs - no problem).
> >>> This is how I write to NAND:
> >>>
> >>> ubiformat -y /dev/mtd5
> >>> ubiattach -p /dev/mtd5
> >>> ubimkvol /dev/ubi0 -N kernel -s 56MiB
> >>> mount -t ubifs ubi0:kernel /mnt
> >>> cp kernel-fit.itb /mnt
> >>> umount /mnt
> >>> ubimkvol /dev/ubi0 -N rootfs -s 180MiB
> >>> ubiupdatevol /dev/ubi0_1 rootfs.ubifs
> >>>
> >>> barebox log:
> >>>
> >>> Booting from NAND
> >>> ubi0: scanning is finished
> >>> ubi0: registering /dev/nand0.UBI.ubi
> >>> ubi0: registering kernel as /dev/nand0.UBI.ubi.kernel
> >>> ubi0: registering rootfs as /dev/nand0.UBI.ubi.rootfs
> >>> ubi0: attached mtd0 (name "nand0.UBI", size 253 MiB) to ubi0
> >>> ubi0: PEB size: 131072 bytes (128 KiB), LEB size: 129024 bytes
> >>> ubi0: min./max. I/O unit sizes: 2048/2048, sub-page size 512
> >>> ubi0: VID header offset: 512 (aligned 512), data offset: 2048
> >>> ubi0: good PEBs: 1999, bad PEBs: 30, corrupted PEBs: 0
> >>
> >> Note that we now have 30 bad PEBs. I suppose these are not
> >> really bad and we need to somehow clear bad block status for these.
> >
> > Do you mean using u-boot's "nand scrab"? So far, I didn't found any
> > other option. There are numerous threads both mtd and barebox mailing
> > lists but no implementation.
> >
> > Unfortunately, I don't have the initial BBT info. So let's hope the
> > system can handle this.
>
>
> "nand scrub" will mark all sectors not-bad so doesn't look like the best option.
> I was wondering if there is a better way to selectively mark individual sectors not bad.
Haven't found anything suitable so far.
> >
> > Btw, I have applied your debug patch and executed a ubiformat command
> > but the debug messages weren't triggered.
>
> That is because you no longer see errors during nand erase. Did you try
> going back to ti,nand-xfer-type = "polled" ?
I have applied the patch to a9e849efca4f9c7732ea4a81f13ec96208994b22
and at that time our DTS still has xfer type as "polled" and ubiformat
command failed as expected.
Yegor
> cheers,
> -roger
>
> >
> > Yegor
> >
> >>> ubi0: user volume: 2, internal volumes: 1, max. volumes count: 128
> >>> ubi0: max/mean erase counter: 19/13, WL threshold: 65536, image
> >>> sequence number: 1371250241
> >>> ubi0: available PEBs: 64, total reserved PEBs: 1935, PEBs reserved for
> >>> bad PEB handling: 10
> >>
> >> Only 10 PEBs reserved for bad PEB handling. So this might be causing
> >> the error while mounting the first volume.
> >>
> >>> UBIFS error (ubi0:0): 8fe548c7: bad superblock, error 13
> >>> magic 0x6101831
> >>> crc 0xfb86a857
> >>> node_type 6 (superblock node)
> >>> group_type 0 (no node group)
> >>> sqnum 2
> >>> len 4096
> >>> key_hash 0 (R5)
> >>> key_fmt 0 (simple)
> >>> flags 0x8
> >>> big_lpt 0
> >>> space_fixup 0
> >>> min_io_size 2048
> >>> leb_size 129024
> >>> leb_cnt 456
> >>> max_leb_cnt 456
> >>> max_bud_bytes 2451456
> >>> log_lebs 3
> >>> lpt_lebs 2
> >>> orph_lebs 2
> >>> jhead_cnt 1
> >>> fanout 8
> >>> lsave_cnt 256
> >>> default_compr 3
> >>> rp_size 2877235
> >>> rp_uid 0
> >>> rp_gid 0
> >>> fmt_version 5
> >>> time_gran 1000000000
> >>> UUID 87fa45e8
> >>> ubifs ubifs0: probe failed: Invalid argument
> >>> mount: Invalid argument
> >>>
> >>> Yegor
> >>
> >> cheers,
> >> -roger
More information about the linux-mtd
mailing list