From: Ivan Djelic <ivan.djelic@parrot.com>
To: "Philip, Avinash" <avinashphilip@ti.com>
Cc: "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: mtd oob test is failing consistently at same places in NAND flash
Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 18:05:48 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120509160548.GB12280@parrot.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <518397C60809E147AF5323E0420B992E3E936732@DBDE01.ent.ti.com>
On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 04:46:17PM +0100, Philip, Avinash wrote:
> > >
> > > Yes, we had using patched kernel. OOB free region is exposed.
> > >
> > > ECC layout will be as follows.
> > >
> > > 0-1 -> BAD block marking
> > > 2-57 -> ECC byte position, ( 14 bytes for 512 byte)
> > > 58-63 -> oob free bytes
> > >
> > > mtd->ecclayout->eccbytes = 56
> > > mtd->ecclayout->eccpos[0] = 2
> > > mtd->ecclayout->oobavail = 6
> > > mtd->ecclayout->oobfree[0].offset = 58
> > > mtd->ecclayout->oobfree[0].length = 6
> > >
> >
> > OK, then it is quite normal that mtd_oobtest should fail when it encounters a bitflip (one that does not match the programmed data) in those unprotected 6 bytes (58-63). What do you think ?
>
>
> Is this behavior is expected for which OOB area left unprotected?
> (I am not sure, What I understood is with failure in OOB area, ECC won't be useful.
Yes.
> Is it ideally we should have ECC protection for OOB area also required?)
There is no need for ECC protection on free oob bytes if you do not use them.
> Basically I am testing why bit flips is happening in OOB area. Some observation related
> to mtd_oob test in the setup we are having is
> 1. Modify mtd_oob test to write patterns (0x0, 0x55, 0xAA, 0xff), then test is getting passed
> for all patterns.
OK, strange.
> 2. On inserting a delay of 10 ms after erase_whole_device() in mtd oob test, test is getting passed.
> I can't correlate how test is getting passed on modifying pattern as we are covering all bits in
> either of the patterns.
>
> On inserting delay test is getting passed, will point to me some problems in command issue. I am
> debugging on this.
>
OK. If you are relying on a R/nB pin to wait for operation completion, you
might want to check that is works properly.
BR,
--
Ivan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-09 16:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-08 12:33 mtd oob test is failing consistently at same places in NAND flash Philip, Avinash
2012-05-08 13:23 ` Ivan Djelic
2012-05-08 15:09 ` Philip, Avinash
2012-05-08 15:23 ` Philip, Avinash
2012-05-08 18:45 ` Ivan Djelic
2012-05-09 15:12 ` Philip, Avinash
2012-05-09 15:24 ` Ivan Djelic
2012-05-09 15:46 ` Philip, Avinash
2012-05-09 16:05 ` Ivan Djelic [this message]
2012-05-10 7:51 ` Ricard Wanderlof
2012-05-09 6:37 ` Ricard Wanderlof
2012-05-10 13:01 ` Artem Bityutskiy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120509160548.GB12280@parrot.com \
--to=ivan.djelic@parrot.com \
--cc=avinashphilip@ti.com \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.