lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Thu, 16 May 2013 10:14:25 +0300
From:	Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>
To:	Huang Shijie <b32955@...escale.com>
Cc:	dwmw2@...radead.org, computersforpeace@...il.com,
	linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 01/11] mtd: add datasheet's ECC information to
 nand_chip{}

On Thu, 2013-05-16 at 10:16 +0800, Huang Shijie wrote:
> 于 2013年05月15日 20:11, Artem Bityutskiy 写道:
> > On Wed, 2013-05-15 at 16:40 +0800, Huang Shijie wrote:
> >> + * @ecc_strength:	[INTERN] ECC correctability from the datasheet.
> >> + *			Minimum amount of bit errors per @ecc_step guaranteed to
> >> + *			be correctable. If unknown, set to zero.
> >> + * @ecc_step:		[INTERN] ECC step required by the @ecc_strength,
> >> + *                      also from the datasheet. It is the recommended ECC step
> >> + *			size, if known; if unknown, set to zero.
> > Here and in other places you talk about "datasheet". Do you assume that
> > the real ECC strength/step used by NAND chips may be different? Or you
> > assume it must be the same?
> >
> The two fields are used to store the ecc info from the datasheet.
> The two fields are just for a reference.
> 
> [1] The nand controller may do not use these two fields, it's ok;
>      For example, the datasheet requires "4bits per 512 bytes".
>      The nand controller can uses 8bits per 512 bytes.
> 
> 
> [2] but sometimes the nand controller must use these two fields.
>      For example, the datasheet requires "40bits per 1024 bytes".
>      For the hardware limit, the nand controller(BCH) may supports the 
> 40bits ecc in the maximum.
>      So the nand controller must use these two fields now.

I wonder if it makes sense to name things so that it is clear form the
names whether that is the "theoretical" datasheet values or the real
ones. I would prefer to clearly distinguish between them, in names and
comments. Thoughts?

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ