Re: [PATCH] NAND: Fix NAND ECC errors on AMD Au1550

Leif Lindholm
2005-11-01T14:49:12Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 944 bytes --]

On Mon, 2005-10-31 at 08:00 -0800, Pete Popov wrote:
> > Just a comment (forgot to post this last time around):
> > At least one of the chips we're using - identified as
> > "NAND device: Manufacturer ID: 0xec, Chip ID: 0x76 (Samsung NAND 64MiB 3,3V 8-bit)"
> > seems to also need the CS manually asserted during a READID operation.
> >
> > This made the if-statements ridicilously long, so I added a case
> > statement and a variable keeping track of wether or not to force-enable
> > CS to the au1550_command function.
> >
> > If there is any interest, I could post a patch, but am unsure of the
> > correct way. Should I send a new patch against cvs HEAD containing my
> > trivial tweak as well as Sergeis modifications, or...?
>
> Send an incremental patch on top of Sergey's patch if you can.

Attached is an incremental patch on top of Sergeys latest patch
(yesterday). Is that's ok, or should I do the same for the old one?

/
Leif

[-- Attachment #2: au1550nd-READID-force-CE.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 2264 bytes --]

--- mtd/drivers/mtd/nand/au1550nd.c 2005-10-31 18:37:29.000000000 +0100
+++ mtd-new/drivers/mtd/nand/au1550nd.c 2005-11-01 15:39:43.000000000 +0100
@@ -343,6 +343,16 @@ static void au1550_command(struct mtd_in
int ce_override = 0, i;
ulong flags;

+ /* Decide wether command needs to force-enable CE or not */
+ switch (command) {
+ case NAND_CMD_READ0:
+ case NAND_CMD_READ1:
+ case NAND_CMD_READOOB:
+ case NAND_CMD_READID:
+ ce_override = 1;
+ break;
+ }
+
/* Begin command latch cycle */
this->hwcontrol(mtd, NAND_CTL_SETCLE);
/*
@@ -382,9 +392,7 @@ static void au1550_command(struct mtd_in
if (page_addr != -1) {
this->write_byte(mtd, (u8)(page_addr & 0xff));

- if (command == NAND_CMD_READ0 ||
- command == NAND_CMD_READ1 ||
- command == NAND_CMD_READOOB) {
+ if (ce_override) {
/*
* NAND controller will release -CE after
* the last address byte is written, so we'll
@@ -393,7 +401,6 @@ static void au1550_command(struct mtd_in
* want the NOR flash or PCMCIA drivers to
* steal our precious bytes of data...
*/
- ce_override = 1;
local_irq_save(flags);
this->hwcontrol(mtd, NAND_CTL_SETNCE);
}
@@ -412,25 +419,7 @@ static void au1550_command(struct mtd_in
* Program and erase have their own busy handlers.
* Status and sequential in need no delay.
*/
- switch (command) {
-
- case NAND_CMD_PAGEPROG:
- case NAND_CMD_ERASE1:
- case NAND_CMD_ERASE2:
- case NAND_CMD_SEQIN:
- case NAND_CMD_STATUS:
- return;
-
- case NAND_CMD_RESET:
- break;
-
- case NAND_CMD_READ0:
- case NAND_CMD_READ1:
- case NAND_CMD_READOOB:
- /* Check if we're really driving -CE low (just in case) */
- if (unlikely(!ce_override))
- break;
-
+ if (ce_override) {
/* Apply a short delay always to ensure that we do wait tWB. */
ndelay(100);
/* Wait for a chip to become ready... */
@@ -442,6 +431,19 @@ static void au1550_command(struct mtd_in
local_irq_restore(flags);
return;
}
+
+ switch (command) {
+
+ case NAND_CMD_PAGEPROG:
+ case NAND_CMD_ERASE1:
+ case NAND_CMD_ERASE2:
+ case NAND_CMD_SEQIN:
+ case NAND_CMD_STATUS:
+ return;
+
+ case NAND_CMD_RESET:
+ break;
+ }
/* Apply this short delay always to ensure that we do wait tWB. */
ndelay(100);