linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] New NAND chip IDs

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 28 Jul 2015 17:32:34 +0200
From:	Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To:	Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>
Cc:	Michal Suchanek <hramrach@...il.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
	Petros Angelatos <petrosagg@...il.com>,
	linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] New NAND chip IDs

Hi,

On 07/28/2015 05:30 PM, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 17:19:40 +0200
> Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Hans,
>>
>> Here is a more appropriate answer ;-)
>>
>> On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 16:49:58 +0200
>> Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 07/28/2015 04:29 PM, Michal Suchanek wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> the NAND chips on Cubietech boards are not known to Linux.
>>>>
>>>> I used Petros Angelatos' patch from sunxi experimental tree for one chip and
>>>> added another chip.
>>>>
>>>> I hope it's ok to send both patches to avoid merge conflict.
>>>
>>> I do not think that these patches are a good idea, this will lead to an
>>> ever growing manual maintained list of ids, and that is not maintainable
>>> IMHO.
>>>
>>> For Samsung chips we only need the ecc strength and size the rest is already
>>> detected on the fly, and I've a patch in my personal tree to get the
>>> ecc strengt and size from the nand without needing to have an entry per
>>> chip:
>>>
>>> https://github.com/jwrdegoede/linux-sunxi/commit/53b335d33232753b7aa70298009158baadf5a6bf
>>>
>>> This is IMHO a much better solution.
>>
>> Yes, indeed, this is a better approach, but AFAIR, not all Samsung
>> chips use this layout to expose the ECC strength/size info, and I
>> guess this is why this method is not used to retrieve the ECC
>> requirements.
>
> At least this was true for Hynix chips (see this thread [1]).
>
> [1]http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.mtd/50252

Correct, I tried to write a similar patch and come to the same
conclusion, there is no way to reliable detect ecc strength / size
in a generic manner for hynix ic-s, for samsung ic-s the bits used
seem to be consistent for all samsung nands though. See the list of
datasheets I checked in the commit msg.

Regards,

Hans

>
--
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/