From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
To: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
Cc: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>,
Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>,
Bean Huo <beanhuo@micron.com>,
Peter Pan <peterpandong@micron.com>,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mtd: rawnand: Do not check FAIL bit when executing a SET_FEATURES op
Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 08:55:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180518085547.0384f405@bbrezillon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180511124407.7314-1-boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
On Fri, 11 May 2018 14:44:07 +0200
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com> wrote:
> The ONFI spec clearly says that FAIL bit is only valid for PROGRAM,
> ERASE and READ-with-on-die-ECC operations, and should be ignored
> otherwise.
>
> It seems that checking it after sending a SET_FEATURES is a bad idea
> because a previous READ, PROGRAM or ERASE op may have failed, and
> depending on the implementation, the FAIL bit is not cleared until a
> new READ, PROGRAM or ERASE is started.
>
> This leads to ->set_features() returning -EIO while it actually worked,
> which can sometimes stop a batch of READ/PROGRAM ops.
>
> Note that we only fix the ->exec_op() path here, because some drivers
> are abusing the NAND_STATUS_FAIL flag in their ->waitfunc()
> implementation to propagate other kind of errors, like
> wait-ready-timeout or controller-related errors. Let's not try to fix
> those drivers since they worked fine so far.
>
> Fixes: 8878b126df76 ("mtd: nand: add ->exec_op() implementation")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Applied to nand/next.
> ---
> This patch is fixing a problem we had with on-die ECC on Micron
> NANDs [1].
> On these chips, when you have an ECC failure, the FAIL bit is set and
> it's not cleared until the next READ operation, which led the following
> SET_FEATURES (used to re-enable on-die ECC) to fail with -EIO and
> stopped the batch of page reads started by UBIFS, which in turn led to
> unmountable FS.
>
> [1]http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/907874/
>
> Changes in v2:
> - Fix the subject prefix
> ---
> drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c | 27 +++++++++------------------
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c
> index f28c3a555861..ee29f34562ab 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c
> @@ -2174,7 +2174,6 @@ static int nand_set_features_op(struct nand_chip *chip, u8 feature,
> struct mtd_info *mtd = nand_to_mtd(chip);
> const u8 *params = data;
> int i, ret;
> - u8 status;
>
> if (chip->exec_op) {
> const struct nand_sdr_timings *sdr =
> @@ -2188,26 +2187,18 @@ static int nand_set_features_op(struct nand_chip *chip, u8 feature,
> };
> struct nand_operation op = NAND_OPERATION(instrs);
>
> - ret = nand_exec_op(chip, &op);
> - if (ret)
> - return ret;
> -
> - ret = nand_status_op(chip, &status);
> - if (ret)
> - return ret;
> - } else {
> - chip->cmdfunc(mtd, NAND_CMD_SET_FEATURES, feature, -1);
> - for (i = 0; i < ONFI_SUBFEATURE_PARAM_LEN; ++i)
> - chip->write_byte(mtd, params[i]);
> + return nand_exec_op(chip, &op);
> + }
>
> - ret = chip->waitfunc(mtd, chip);
> - if (ret < 0)
> - return ret;
> + chip->cmdfunc(mtd, NAND_CMD_SET_FEATURES, feature, -1);
> + for (i = 0; i < ONFI_SUBFEATURE_PARAM_LEN; ++i)
> + chip->write_byte(mtd, params[i]);
>
> - status = ret;
> - }
> + ret = chip->waitfunc(mtd, chip);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
>
> - if (status & NAND_STATUS_FAIL)
> + if (ret & NAND_STATUS_FAIL)
> return -EIO;
>
> return 0;
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-18 6:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-11 12:44 [PATCH v2] mtd: rawnand: Do not check FAIL bit when executing a SET_FEATURES op Boris Brezillon
2018-05-14 8:54 ` Miquel Raynal
2018-05-18 6:55 ` Boris Brezillon [this message]
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=20180518085547.0384f405@bbrezillon \
--to=boris.brezillon@bootlin.com \
--cc=beanhuo@micron.com \
--cc=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=marek.vasut@gmail.com \
--cc=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
--cc=peterpandong@micron.com \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com \
/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.