From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: maramaopercheseimorto@gmail.com (Alberto Panizzo) Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 23:33:20 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] mx31pdk: Add NAND support In-Reply-To: <933005.90402.qm@web51001.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <933005.90402.qm@web51001.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1267137200.2810.10.camel@realization> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On gio, 2010-02-25 at 14:22 -0800, Fabio Estevam wrote: > --- On Thu, 2/25/10, Fabio Estevam wrote: > > ... > > > > > > > Are you sure that this works? Don't you see a lot of > > Bad > > > blocks reports > > > in boot messages? > > > > I followed the same approach used on other i.MX boards. > > This is what I see: > > ... > > NAND device: Manufacturer ID: 0xec, Chip ID: 0xaa (Samsung > > NAND 256MiB 1,8V 8-bit) > > Scanning device for bad blocks > > Bad eraseblock 42 at 0x000000540000 > > Bad eraseblock 125 at 0x000000fa0000 > > Bad eraseblock 887 at 0x000006ee0000 > > Bad eraseblock 1750 at 0x00000dac0000 > > Bad eraseblock 2046 at 0x00000ffc0000 > > Bad eraseblock 2047 at 0x00000ffe0000 > > > > Just looked at what Redboot reported: > > ++Searching for BBT table in the flash ... > . > Found version 1 Bbt0 at block 2047 (0xffe0000) > Block 42 is bad > Block 125 is bad > Block 887 is bad > Block 1750 is bad > Total bad blocks: 4 > > So the only mismatch is 2046 eraseblock. > > Regards, > > Fabio Estevam > What kernel are you running? In particular, what version of mxc_nand.c are you building? Recently the mxc_nand.c has been updated to support newer i.MX SoC and the problem come after this update. (add NFC_NAND V2 support) -- Alberto! Be Persistent! - Greg Kroah-Hartman (FOSDEM 2010)