From: "Andreas Bießmann" <andreas.biessmann@corscience.de>
To: jean-philippe francois <jp.francois@cynove.com>
Cc: Ivan Djelic <ivan.djelic@parrot.com>,
"linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: U-boot bch4_sw vs omap bch4_hw
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 11:35:02 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50C5BAD6.2010500@corscience.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGGh5h2CoQTbOL32+f3jhtvUwCbFp7EPhL7g61PFkVGtXwAd-w@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Ivan Djelic and Jean-Philippe Francois,
On 10.12.2012 10:41, jean-philippe francois wrote:
> 2012/12/8 Ivan Djelic <ivan.djelic@parrot.com>:
>> On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 03:26:06PM +0000, jean-philippe francois wrote:
>>> Hi Ivan,
>>>
>>> I have applied your patches for hardware bch ecc support on
>>> OMAP. On the linux side, everything is fine. However I have some trouble
>>> when it comes to u-boot and kernel interoperability.
>>>
>>> A nand page written with bch4_sw ecc by U-boot fails the ecc step when
>>> read by the kernel. Looking at a nanddump, OOB placement and size of
>>> the ecc data are the same.
>>>
>>> Do you know of any patch for u-boot that would make the bch4_sw ecc
>>> identical to the kernel one ?
can you both please have a loot at
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/147698
>> Hi Jean-Philippe,
>>
>> If you point me to a git repo with the exact u-boot version you are using,
>> I can probably provide a patch (or at least understand the problem).
>> BR,
>> --
>> Ivan
> I am using an u-boot from the arago project :
> http://arago-project.org/git/projects/?p=u-boot-omap3.git;a=tags
>
> So it is quite old.
> I will probably have to modify x-loader, too.
current u-boot do not need x-loader any more.
> Both implementation use very similar file for hardware assisted
> bch decoding.
>
> If this code is too old for you to look at, could you help me find an omap
> project that "new ecc" all the way up from x-loader to u-boot + kernel ?
>
> If I understands things correctly, I have two options if I want to use
> Nand that needs
> 4-bit ecc :
> - Stick with the old ecc scheme in x-loader and u-boot, and use
> software 4-bit bch in the kernel.
> Is this compatible with using ubifs ?
> - Implement new ecc scheme in x-loader and u-boot, and use hardware
> assisted bch-4 in the kernel.
> Is this correct ?
* use 1-bit hamming 'ROM-layout' for SPL mtd and 4-bit BCH8 in all
other sections, see my u-boot patches.
Would be great to have some testers for these patches.
Best regards
Andreas Bießmann
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-12-10 10:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-12-07 15:26 U-boot bch4_sw vs omap bch4_hw jean-philippe francois
2012-12-08 8:29 ` Ivan Djelic
2012-12-10 9:41 ` jean-philippe francois
2012-12-10 10:35 ` Andreas Bießmann [this message]
2012-12-10 11:11 ` Andreas Bießmann
2012-12-13 14:35 ` Ivan Djelic
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=50C5BAD6.2010500@corscience.de \
--to=andreas.biessmann@corscience.de \
--cc=ivan.djelic@parrot.com \
--cc=jp.francois@cynove.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.