From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
To: Stefan Agner <stefan@agner.ch>
Cc: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: nand_op_parser_exec_op should use longest pattern
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2019 23:30:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190408233027.7caa1281@xps13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <270be087c7dda47f208d194c0671f902@agner.ch>
Hi Stefan,
Stefan Agner <stefan@agner.ch> wrote on Mon, 08 Apr 2019 22:00:18 +0200:
> Hi Boris,
>
> On 30.03.2019 10:21, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> > +Miquel
> >
> > On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 15:37:56 +0100
> > Stefan Agner <stefan@agner.ch> wrote:
> >
> >> On 29.03.2019 14:35, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> >> > Hi All,
> >> >
> >> > I just played with the new exec_op interface for the first time and
> >> > together with Boris we found a problem in the pattern table parser.
> >> >
> >> > The vf610 driver uses this pattern table:
> >> >
> >> > static const struct nand_op_parser vf610_nfc_op_parser = NAND_OP_PARSER(
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PATTERN(vf610_nfc_cmd,
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_CMD_ELEM(true),
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_ADDR_ELEM(true, 5),
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_DATA_OUT_ELEM(true, PAGE_2K + OOB_MAX),
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_CMD_ELEM(true),
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_WAITRDY_ELEM(true)),
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PATTERN(vf610_nfc_cmd,
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_CMD_ELEM(true),
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_ADDR_ELEM(true, 5),
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_CMD_ELEM(true),
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_WAITRDY_ELEM(true),
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_DATA_IN_ELEM(true, PAGE_2K + OOB_MAX)),
> >> > );
> >> >
> >> > It has two patterns, one supposed for writing and one for reading. All elements
> >> > are optional. Now with a typical page read we'll get this:
> >> >
> >> > [ 33.932464] nand: ->CMD [0x00]
> >> > [ 33.936338] nand: ->ADDR [5 cyc: 00 00 00 0a 00]
> >> > [ 33.941755] nand: ->CMD [0x30]
> >> > [ 33.945628] nand: ->WAITRDY [max 1 ms]
> >> > [ 33.949909] nand: DATA_IN [2176 B]
>
> Hm, since I use HW ECC (which uses custom function calls), I do not get
> such large data reads. But I do have OOB reads from time to time:
>
> [ 4.603585] nand: executing subop:
> [ 4.603616] nand: ->CMD [0x00]
> [ 4.603646] nand: ->ADDR [5 cyc: 00 08 ea 94 02]
> [ 4.603673] nand: ->CMD [0x30]
> [ 4.603700] nand: ->WAITRDY [max 200000 ms]
> [ 4.603727] nand: DATA_IN [64 B]
> [ 4.603881] nand: executing subop:
> [ 4.603912] nand: CMD [0x00]
> [ 4.603941] nand: ADDR [5 cyc: 00 08 ea 94 02]
> [ 4.603968] nand: CMD [0x30]
> [ 4.603994] nand: WAITRDY [max 200000 ms]
> [ 4.604022] nand: ->DATA_IN [64 B]
>
>
>
> >> >
> >> > Only the first four elements are executed in one go, the fifth is
> >> > exectuted separately. This is because the pattern table parser finds
> >> > that the first pattern (supposed for writing) already matches for the
> >> > first four elements and then uses it instead of realizing that the
> >> > second pattern matches the whole operation.
> >>
> >> Hm, I do not remember noticing that during development. I wonder if it
> >> was the case already back then.
> >>
> >> If yes, it did not seem to have a negative impact on performance
> >> compared to the old interface:
> >> https://linux-mtd.infradead.narkive.com/qZgEnPsC/patch-v6-0-3-mtd-rawnand-vf610-nfc-make-use-of-exec-op
> >>
> >> >
> >> > I have no fix for this, just wanted to let you know. It turned out that
> >> > in my case for the GPMI nand driver I probably won't need any pattern
> >> > table.
> >>
> >> Thanks for bringing it up! Will try it out when I come around.
> >
> > Here is a new version of the proposed fix that compiles, at
> > least :-). Still not tested tested on a real HW though.
>
> Tested it here, seems to boot a rootfs from flash just fine!
>
> The OOB reads look like this now:
> [ 74.478469] nand: executing subop:
> [ 74.478500] nand: ->CMD [0x00]
> [ 74.478529] nand: ->ADDR [5 cyc: 00 08 c0 1d 00]
> [ 74.478555] nand: ->CMD [0x30]
> [ 74.478580] nand: ->WAITRDY [max 200000 ms]
> [ 74.478606] nand: ->DATA_IN [64 B]
>
> So the patch below seems to do what we intend.
Great! Stefan, I know Boris is busy, can you please send the patch?
Thanks!
Miquèl
______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-08 21:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-29 13:35 nand_op_parser_exec_op should use longest pattern Sascha Hauer
2019-03-29 13:57 ` Boris Brezillon
2019-03-29 14:37 ` Stefan Agner
2019-03-30 9:21 ` Boris Brezillon
2019-04-08 20:00 ` Stefan Agner
2019-04-08 21:30 ` Miquel Raynal [this message]
2019-04-16 21:22 ` Miquel Raynal
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=20190408233027.7caa1281@xps13 \
--to=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
--cc=boris.brezillon@collabora.com \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
--cc=stefan@agner.ch \
/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.