From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: andrew@lunn.ch (Andrew Lunn) Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 21:59:56 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: kirkwood: Increase NAND chip-delay for DNS-320 In-Reply-To: <1351457262-11506-1-git-send-email-jm@lentin.co.uk> References: <1351457262-11506-1-git-send-email-jm@lentin.co.uk> Message-ID: <20121028205956.GH15143@lunn.ch> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 08:47:42PM +0000, Jamie Lentin wrote: > The default chip-delay of 25ns is a bit too tight for some DNS-320's, > increase to 35ns. > > Signed-off-by: Jamie Lentin > --- > I now own 2 DNS-320's, the first of which is happy with a mainline > kernel, the second fills the console with "Bad eraseblock xxx at > 0x00000xxxxxxx" for every eraseblock and refuses to access the NAND. > Beyond this they appear identical, and report the same NAND chip > (I haven't physically checked that it's the same, however). > > The patch below fixes it, however:- > * Is there something else I should be trying, rather than potentially > masking the problem? > * Is chip-delay too low for kirkwood generally? Do you know what NAND chip it is? We can check the datasheet and see what is specified. All kirkwood's use 25ns and i don't think there have been any problems reported. But that does not mean Dlink have mounted a slower device. Andrew