linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] mtd: spinand: add support for Foresee FS35ND01G

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

Date:   Tue, 5 Jan 2021 21:18:21 +0900
From:   Daniel Palmer <daniel@...f.com>
To:     Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
Cc:     linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        richard@....at, vigneshr@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mtd: spinand: add support for Foresee FS35ND01G

Hi Miquel,

On Mon, 4 Jan 2021 at 23:17, Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com> wrote:
> Perhaps giving the link of the datasheet here makes sense.

Noted. I'll put that into v2.

> > +#define SPINAND_MFR_LONGSYS          0xcd
>
> Nitpick: I personally prefer uppercase hex numbers.
>

Noted.

> > +                  NAND_MEMORG(1, 2048, 64, 64, 1024, 20, 1, 1, 1),
> > +                  NAND_ECCREQ(4, 512),
> > +                  SPINAND_INFO_OP_VARIANTS(&read_cache_variants,
> > +                                           &write_cache_variants,
> > +                                           &update_cache_variants),
>
> This device probably supports more variants (especially dual/quad
> ones) but I guess it's not a problem to not have them here right now.

Right now I can't really test dual or quad because my SPI driver
doesn't know to do dual or quad io.
I plan to add those in once I can validate they work.

> > +                  SPINAND_HAS_QE_BIT,
> > +                  SPINAND_ECCINFO(NULL,
> > +                                  NULL)),
>
> You should define the ->ecc and ->free hooks of the
> mtd_ooblayout_ops structure and point to it here. It defines the free
> OOB bytes and bytes used by the on-die ECC engine. You should find this
> in the datasheet. You may look at other manufacturer drivers for
> examples of how it should be implemented. It is the way to tell the
> upper layers that eg. "byte 2 to 17 are ECC bytes, 18 until the end are
> free to use".

Ok I'll add those in. Is there a way I can test that my implementation is right?
I.e. is writing something, reading it back and checking if the data is
correct a good enough test here?
I don't really want to make it look like this flash is supported and
break someone's data. :)

Thanks,

Daniel