From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
To: wang wei <a929244872@163.com>
Cc: richard@nod.at, vigneshr@ti.com, bbrezillon@kernel.org,
yamada.masahiro@socionext.com, wenyou.yang@microchip.com,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/mtd: rawnand: nandsim: Fix stale NAND_ROW_ADDR_3 with overridesize
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2026 12:54:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <875wzlofmj.fsf@bootlin.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261001103359.20216-1-a929244872@163.com> (wang wei's message of "Thu, 1 Oct 2026 18:33:59 +0800")
Hi Wang,
On 01/10/2026 at 18:33:59 +08, wang wei <a929244872@163.com> wrote:
> The overridesize module parameter changes the size of the simulated
> device after nand_scan() has completed. It updates nsmtd->size,
> memorg->eraseblocks_per_lun, chip->chip_shift and chip->pagemask to
> match the new geometry, but leaves the NAND_ROW_ADDR_3 option
> untouched, even though nand_scan_ident() set it from the geometry
> decoded out of the ID bytes.
>
> When the ID bytes describe a device larger than 128 MiB and
> overridesize shrinks the simulation to 128 MiB or less, the stale
> option makes the core emit one extra row address byte (page >> 16,
> always zero given the reduced page count) in every read, program and
> erase operation, while the simulator state machine expects one byte
> less. All accesses then fail with:
>
> nandsim: error: write_byte: address (0x0) isn't expected, expected
> state is STATE_CMD_READSTART, switch to STATE_READY
>
> The opposite direction is equally broken: growing a small device past
> 128 MiB keeps NAND_ROW_ADDR_3 cleared, so the third row address byte
> is dropped and the wrong pages are silently addressed.
Fine until here.
> This used to work before commit 14157f861437 ("mtd: nand: introduce
> NAND_ROW_ADDR_3 flag"). Back then nandsim kept chip->chipsize in sync
,
> with the override, and nand_command_lp() decided at run time, per
> command, whether the third row address cycle was needed by testing
> chip->chipsize against 128 MiB. The decision thus always saw the
"The decision"?
> overridden size. The above commit moved the decision to
> nand_scan_ident(), which encodes it once into NAND_ROW_ADDR_3 at
> scan time -- before nandsim applies the override -- and the
> overridesize path was never taught to re-evaluate the flag. The
> commit that introduced the regression is:
>
> https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/14157f861437ebe2d624b0a845b91bbdf8ca9a2d
This is not needed, you mention it above and below already.
> Re-evaluate NAND_ROW_ADDR_3 right after overriding chip_shift, using
> the same test as nand_scan_ident(), so that the address width emitted
> by the core always matches ns->geom.pgaddrbytes, which ns_init()
> derives from the overridden total size.
>
> Fixes: 14157f861437 ("mtd: nand: introduce NAND_ROW_ADDR_3 flag")
Cc: stable
> Signed-off-by: wang wei <a929244872@163.com>
> ---
> drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nandsim.c | 12 ++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nandsim.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nandsim.c
> index fe96803..176db89 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nandsim.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nandsim.c
> @@ -2359,6 +2359,18 @@ static int __init ns_init_module(void)
> targetsize = nanddev_target_size(&chip->base);
> chip->chip_shift = ffs(nsmtd->erasesize) + overridesize - 1;
> chip->pagemask = (targetsize >> chip->page_shift) - 1;
> +
> + /*
> + * NAND_ROW_ADDR_3 was set by nand_scan_ident() from the
> + * geometry decoded out of the ID bytes, which the size
> + * override has just made stale. Re-evaluate it against
> + * the new geometry, otherwise the core emits one more (or
> + * one less) row address byte than the simulator expects.
> + */
Everything above this line can just be deleted. Tell your LLM that this
is obvious enough and does not require any particular comment.
> + if (chip->chip_shift - chip->page_shift > 16)
> + chip->options |= NAND_ROW_ADDR_3;
> + else
> + chip->options &= ~NAND_ROW_ADDR_3;
> }
>
> ret = ns_setup_wear_reporting(nsmtd);
Instead of repeating the operation in nandsim, why not calling
nand_scan() after over writing the size? (inverting the two blocks)
Thanks,
Miquèl
______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-01 10:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-01 10:33 [PATCH] drivers/mtd: rawnand: nandsim: Fix stale NAND_ROW_ADDR_3 with overridesize wang wei
2026-10-01 10:54 ` Miquel Raynal [this message]
[not found] ` <eeef96a.1a8e.1a0f74ef8cf.Coremail.a929244872@163.com>
2026-10-01 12:34 ` Miquel Raynal
2026-10-01 12:36 ` wang wei
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=875wzlofmj.fsf@bootlin.com \
--to=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
--cc=a929244872@163.com \
--cc=bbrezillon@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=vigneshr@ti.com \
--cc=wenyou.yang@microchip.com \
--cc=yamada.masahiro@socionext.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.