[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180422183440.3ce7e7aa@xps13>
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 18:34:40 +0200
From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
To: Abhishek Sahu <absahu@...eaurora.org>
Cc: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...tlin.com>,
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>,
Archit Taneja <architt@...eaurora.org>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@...il.com>,
linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@...ev4u.fr>,
Andy Gross <andy.gross@...aro.org>,
Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] mtd: nand: qcom: use the ecc strength from device
parameter
Hi Abhishek,
On Thu, 12 Apr 2018 15:29:48 +0530, Abhishek Sahu
<absahu@...eaurora.org> wrote:
> On 2018-04-10 13:37, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> > On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:55:58 +0200
> > Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com> wrote:
> > >> > Hi Abhishek,
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:39:35 +0530, Abhishek Sahu
> >> > <absahu@...eaurora.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > On 2018-04-06 18:01, Miquel Raynal wrote:
> >> > > > Hi Abhishek,
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Wed, 4 Apr 2018 18:12:17 +0530, Abhishek Sahu
> >> > > > <absahu@...eaurora.org> wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >> Currently the driver uses the ECC strength specified in
> >> > > >> device tree. The ONFI or JEDEC device parameter page
> >> > > >> contains the ‘ECC correctability’ field which indicates the
> >> > > >> number of bits that the host should be able to correct per
> >> > > >> 512 bytes of data.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > This is misleading. This field is not about the controller but rather
> >> > > > the chip requirements in terms of minimal strength for nominal use.
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Thanks Miquel.
> >> > >
> >> > > Yes. Its NAND chip requirement. I have used the description for
> >> > > NAND ONFI param page
> >> > >
> >> > > 5.6.1.24. Byte 112: Number of bits ECC correctability
> >> > > This field indicates the number of bits that the host should be
> >> > > able to correct per 512 bytes of data.
> >> > >
> >> > > >> The ecc correctability is assigned in
> >> > > >> chip parameter during device probe time. QPIC/EBI2 NAND
> >> > > >> supports 4/8-bit ecc correction. The Same kind of board
> >> > > >> can have different NAND parts so use the ecc strength
> >> > > >> from device parameter (if its non zero) instead of
> >> > > >> device tree.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > That is not what you do.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > What you do is forcing the strength to be 8-bit per ECC chunk if the
> >> > > > NAND chip requires at least 8-bit/chunk strength.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > The DT property is here to force a strength. Otherwise, Linux will
> >> > > > propose to the NAND controller to use the minimum strength required by
> >> > > > the chip (from either the ONFI/JEDEC parameter page or from a static
> >> > > > table).
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > The main problem is that the same kind of boards can have different
> >> > > NAND parts.
> >> > >
> >> > > Lets assume, we have following 2 cases.
> >> > >
> >> > > 1. Non ONFI/JEDEC device for which chip->ecc_strength_ds
> >> > > will be zero. In this case, the ecc->strength from DT
> >> > > will be used
> >> >
> >> > No, the strength from DT will always be used if the property is
> >> > present, no matter the type of chip.
> >> >
> >> > > 2. ONFI/JEDEC device for which chip->ecc_strength_ds > 8.
> >> > > Since QCOM nand controller can not support
> >> > > ECC correction greater than 8 bits so we can use 8 bit ECC
> >> > > itself instead of failing NAND boot completely.
> >> >
> >> > I understand that. But this is still not what you do.
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > > > IMHO, you have two solutions:
> >> > > > 1/ Remove these properties from the board DT (breaks DT backward
> >> > > > compatibility though);
> >> > >
> >> > > - nand-ecc-strength: This is optional property in nand.txt and
> >> > > Required property in qcom_nandc.txt.
> >> >
> >> > Well, this property is not controller specific but chip specific. The
> >> > controller driver does not rely on it, so this property should not be
> >> > required.
> >> >
> >> > > We can't remove since
> >> > > if the device is Non ONFI/JEDEC, then ecc strength will come
> >> > > from DT only.
> >> >
> >> > We can remove it and let the core handle this (as this is generic to
> >> > all raw NANDs and not specific to this controller driver). Try it out!
>
> Thanks Boris and Miquel for your inputs.
>
> Just want to confirm if already its implemented in core layer
> or shall I explore regrading this option.
>
> I checked by removing this property alone from dtsi and it was
> failing with
>
> "Driver must set ecc.strength when using hardware ECC"
>
> I checked the code in nand_base.c also but couldn't get
> anything related with this.
I don't know exactly what you did but you should have a look at what
lead you to this path:
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v4.17-rc1/source/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c#L6421
Thanks,
Miquèl
Powered by blists - more mailing lists