* [PATCH v2 1/2] mtd/nand, BB detect: factory marker in page 1, 2, last and byte 1 or 6
2010-07-13 22:12 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] Improved BB Scanning Brian Norris
@ 2010-07-13 22:13 ` Brian Norris
2010-07-13 22:13 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] mtd/nand: More BB Detection, dynamic scan options Brian Norris
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Brian Norris @ 2010-07-13 22:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-mtd
Cc: Maxim Levitsky, Thomas Gleixner, David Woodhouse, Brian Norris,
Artem Bityutskiy
Some level of support for various scanning locations was already built in,
but this required clean-up. First, BB marker location cannot be determined
_only_ by the page size. Instead, I implemented some heuristic detection
based on data sheets from various manufacturers (all found in
nand_base.c:nand_get_flash_type()).
Second, once these options were identified, they were not handled properly
by nand_bbt.c:nand_default_bbt(). I updated the static nand_bbt_desc structs
to reflect the need for more combinations of detection. The memory allocation
here probably needs to be done dynamically in the very near future (see next
patches).
Signed-off-by: Brian Norris <norris@broadcom.com>
---
drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++---
drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
2 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
index e6cf9ae..bd69790 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
@@ -2920,9 +2920,14 @@ static struct nand_flash_dev *nand_get_flash_type(struct mtd_info *mtd,
chip->chip_shift = ffs((unsigned)(chip->chipsize >> 32)) + 32 - 1;
/* Set the bad block position */
- chip->badblockpos = mtd->writesize > 512 ?
- NAND_LARGE_BADBLOCK_POS : NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS;
- chip->badblockbits = 8;
+ if (!(busw & NAND_BUSWIDTH_16) && (*maf_id == NAND_MFR_STMICRO ||
+ (*maf_id == NAND_MFR_SAMSUNG &&
+ mtd->writesize == 512) ||
+ *maf_id == NAND_MFR_AMD))
+ chip->badblockpos = NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS;
+ else
+ chip->badblockpos = NAND_LARGE_BADBLOCK_POS;
+
/* Get chip options, preserve non chip based options */
chip->options &= ~NAND_CHIPOPTIONS_MSK;
@@ -2941,12 +2946,23 @@ static struct nand_flash_dev *nand_get_flash_type(struct mtd_info *mtd,
/*
* Bad block marker is stored in the last page of each block
- * on Samsung and Hynix MLC devices
+ * on Samsung and Hynix MLC devices; stored in first two pages
+ * of each block on Micron devices with 2KiB pages and on
+ * SLC Samsung, Hynix, and AMD/Spansion. All others scan only
+ * the first page.
*/
if ((chip->cellinfo & NAND_CI_CELLTYPE_MSK) &&
(*maf_id == NAND_MFR_SAMSUNG ||
*maf_id == NAND_MFR_HYNIX))
chip->options |= NAND_BBT_SCANLASTPAGE;
+ else if ((!(chip->cellinfo & NAND_CI_CELLTYPE_MSK) &&
+ (*maf_id == NAND_MFR_SAMSUNG ||
+ *maf_id == NAND_MFR_HYNIX ||
+ *maf_id == NAND_MFR_AMD)) ||
+ (mtd->writesize == 2048 &&
+ *maf_id == NAND_MFR_MICRON))
+ chip->options |= NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE;
+
/* Check for AND chips with 4 page planes */
if (chip->options & NAND_4PAGE_ARRAY)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c
index 71d83be..ec1700e 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c
@@ -1093,29 +1093,50 @@ int nand_update_bbt(struct mtd_info *mtd, loff_t offs)
static uint8_t scan_ff_pattern[] = { 0xff, 0xff };
static struct nand_bbt_descr smallpage_memorybased = {
- .options = NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE,
- .offs = 5,
+ .options = 0,
+ .offs = NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS,
.len = 1,
.pattern = scan_ff_pattern
};
+static struct nand_bbt_descr smallpage_scan2nd_memorybased = {
+ .options = NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE,
+ .offs = NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS,
+ .len = 2,
+ .pattern = scan_ff_pattern
+};
+
static struct nand_bbt_descr largepage_memorybased = {
.options = 0,
- .offs = 0,
+ .offs = NAND_LARGE_BADBLOCK_POS,
+ .len = 1,
+ .pattern = scan_ff_pattern
+};
+
+static struct nand_bbt_descr largepage_scan2nd_memorybased = {
+ .options = NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE,
+ .offs = NAND_LARGE_BADBLOCK_POS,
.len = 2,
.pattern = scan_ff_pattern
};
+static struct nand_bbt_descr lastpage_memorybased = {
+ .options = NAND_BBT_SCANLASTPAGE,
+ .offs = 0,
+ .len = 1,
+ .pattern = scan_ff_pattern
+};
+
static struct nand_bbt_descr smallpage_flashbased = {
.options = NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE,
- .offs = 5,
+ .offs = NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS,
.len = 1,
.pattern = scan_ff_pattern
};
static struct nand_bbt_descr largepage_flashbased = {
.options = NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE,
- .offs = 0,
+ .offs = NAND_LARGE_BADBLOCK_POS,
.len = 2,
.pattern = scan_ff_pattern
};
@@ -1197,8 +1218,18 @@ int nand_default_bbt(struct mtd_info *mtd)
this->bbt_td = NULL;
this->bbt_md = NULL;
if (!this->badblock_pattern) {
- this->badblock_pattern = (mtd->writesize > 512) ?
- &largepage_memorybased : &smallpage_memorybased;
+ if (this->options & NAND_BBT_SCANLASTPAGE)
+ this->badblock_pattern = &lastpage_memorybased;
+ else if (this->options & NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE)
+ this->badblock_pattern = this->badblockpos ==
+ NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS ?
+ &smallpage_scan2nd_memorybased :
+ &largepage_scan2nd_memorybased;
+ else
+ this->badblock_pattern = this->badblockpos ==
+ NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS ?
+ &smallpage_memorybased :
+ &largepage_memorybased;
}
}
return nand_scan_bbt(mtd, this->badblock_pattern);
--
1.7.0.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* [PATCH v2 2/2] mtd/nand: More BB Detection, dynamic scan options
2010-07-13 22:12 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] Improved BB Scanning Brian Norris
2010-07-13 22:13 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] mtd/nand, BB detect: factory marker in page 1, 2, last and byte 1 or 6 Brian Norris
@ 2010-07-13 22:13 ` Brian Norris
2010-07-13 23:56 ` Brian Norris
2010-07-18 16:38 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] Improved BB Scanning Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-21 23:53 ` [PATCH] mtd/nand: Update nand_default_block_markbad() Brian Norris
3 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Brian Norris @ 2010-07-13 22:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-mtd
Cc: Maxim Levitsky, Thomas Gleixner, David Woodhouse, Brian Norris,
Artem Bityutskiy
Added new flag for scanning of both bytes 1 and 6 of the OOB for
a BB marker (instead of simply one or the other).
In order to handle increases in variety of necessary scanning patterns,
I implemented dynamic memory allocation of nand_bbt_descr structs
in new function 'nand_create_default_bbt_descr()'. This replaces
some increasingly-unwieldy, statically-declared descriptors. It can
replace several more (e.g. "flashbased" structs). However, I do not
test the flashbased options personally.
Signed-off-by: Brian Norris <norris@broadcom.com>
---
drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c | 14 +++++
drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c | 116 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
include/linux/mtd/bbm.h | 4 ++
3 files changed, 79 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
index bd69790..c2901bd 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
@@ -2963,6 +2963,15 @@ static struct nand_flash_dev *nand_get_flash_type(struct mtd_info *mtd,
*maf_id == NAND_MFR_MICRON))
chip->options |= NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE;
+ /*
+ * Numonyx/ST 2K pages, x8 bus use BOTH byte 1 and 6
+ */
+ if (!(busw & NAND_BUSWIDTH_16) &&
+ *maf_id == NAND_MFR_STMICRO &&
+ mtd->writesize == 2048) {
+ chip->options |= NAND_BBT_SCANBYTE1AND6;
+ chip->badblockpos = 0;
+ }
/* Check for AND chips with 4 page planes */
if (chip->options & NAND_4PAGE_ARRAY)
@@ -3322,6 +3331,11 @@ void nand_release(struct mtd_info *mtd)
kfree(chip->bbt);
if (!(chip->options & NAND_OWN_BUFFERS))
kfree(chip->buffers);
+
+ /* Free bad block descriptor memory */
+ if (chip->badblock_pattern && chip->badblock_pattern->options
+ & NAND_BBT_DYNAMICSTRUCT)
+ kfree(chip->badblock_pattern);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(nand_lock);
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c
index ec1700e..474ff66 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c
@@ -397,12 +397,10 @@ static int create_bbt(struct mtd_info *mtd, uint8_t *buf,
if (bd->options & NAND_BBT_SCANALLPAGES)
len = 1 << (this->bbt_erase_shift - this->page_shift);
- else {
- if (bd->options & NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE)
- len = 2;
- else
- len = 1;
- }
+ else if (bd->options & NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE)
+ len = 2;
+ else
+ len = 1;
if (!(bd->options & NAND_BBT_SCANEMPTY)) {
/* We need only read few bytes from the OOB area */
@@ -447,6 +445,24 @@ static int create_bbt(struct mtd_info *mtd, uint8_t *buf,
if (ret < 0)
return ret;
+ /* Check if we need a second scan for the 6th byte
+ * Perhaps there is a more efficient way of doing this?
+ */
+ if (!ret && bd->options & NAND_BBT_SCANBYTE1AND6) {
+ bd->offs = NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS;
+ if (bd->options & NAND_BBT_SCANALLPAGES)
+ ret = scan_block_full(mtd, bd, from, buf,
+ readlen, scanlen, len);
+ else
+ ret = scan_block_fast(mtd, bd, from, buf, len);
+
+ /* Reset offset for future scans */
+ bd->offs = NAND_LARGE_BADBLOCK_POS;
+
+ if (ret < 0)
+ return ret;
+ }
+
if (ret) {
this->bbt[i >> 3] |= 0x03 << (i & 0x6);
printk(KERN_WARNING "Bad eraseblock %d at 0x%012llx\n",
@@ -1092,41 +1108,6 @@ int nand_update_bbt(struct mtd_info *mtd, loff_t offs)
* while scanning a device for factory marked good / bad blocks. */
static uint8_t scan_ff_pattern[] = { 0xff, 0xff };
-static struct nand_bbt_descr smallpage_memorybased = {
- .options = 0,
- .offs = NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS,
- .len = 1,
- .pattern = scan_ff_pattern
-};
-
-static struct nand_bbt_descr smallpage_scan2nd_memorybased = {
- .options = NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE,
- .offs = NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS,
- .len = 2,
- .pattern = scan_ff_pattern
-};
-
-static struct nand_bbt_descr largepage_memorybased = {
- .options = 0,
- .offs = NAND_LARGE_BADBLOCK_POS,
- .len = 1,
- .pattern = scan_ff_pattern
-};
-
-static struct nand_bbt_descr largepage_scan2nd_memorybased = {
- .options = NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE,
- .offs = NAND_LARGE_BADBLOCK_POS,
- .len = 2,
- .pattern = scan_ff_pattern
-};
-
-static struct nand_bbt_descr lastpage_memorybased = {
- .options = NAND_BBT_SCANLASTPAGE,
- .offs = 0,
- .len = 1,
- .pattern = scan_ff_pattern
-};
-
static struct nand_bbt_descr smallpage_flashbased = {
.options = NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE,
.offs = NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS,
@@ -1175,6 +1156,43 @@ static struct nand_bbt_descr bbt_mirror_descr = {
.pattern = mirror_pattern
};
+#define BBT_SCAN_OPTIONS (NAND_BBT_SCANLASTPAGE | NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE | \
+ NAND_BBT_SCANBYTE1AND6)
+/**
+ * nand_create_default_bbt_descr - [Internal] Creates a BBT descriptor structure
+ * @this: NAND chip to create descriptor for
+ *
+ * This function allocates and initializes a nand_bbt_descr for BBM detection
+ * based on the properties of "this". The new descriptor is stored in
+ * this->badblock_pattern. Thus, this->badblock_pattern should be NULL when
+ * passed to this function.
+ *
+ * TODO: Handle other flags, replace other static structs
+ * (e.g. handle NAND_BBT_FLASH for flash-based BBT,
+ * replace smallpage_flashbased)
+ *
+ */
+static int nand_create_default_bbt_descr(struct nand_chip *this)
+{
+ struct nand_bbt_descr *bd;
+ if (this->badblock_pattern) {
+ printk(KERN_WARNING "BBT descr already allocated; not replacing.\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+ bd = kzalloc(sizeof(*bd), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!bd) {
+ printk(KERN_ERR "nand_create_default_bbt_descr: Out of memory\n");
+ return -ENOMEM;
+ }
+ bd->options = this->options & BBT_SCAN_OPTIONS;
+ bd->offs = this->badblockpos;
+ bd->len = (this->options & NAND_BUSWIDTH_16) ? 2 : 1;
+ bd->pattern = scan_ff_pattern;
+ bd->options |= NAND_BBT_DYNAMICSTRUCT;
+ this->badblock_pattern = bd;
+ return 0;
+}
+
/**
* nand_default_bbt - [NAND Interface] Select a default bad block table for the device
* @mtd: MTD device structure
@@ -1217,20 +1235,8 @@ int nand_default_bbt(struct mtd_info *mtd)
} else {
this->bbt_td = NULL;
this->bbt_md = NULL;
- if (!this->badblock_pattern) {
- if (this->options & NAND_BBT_SCANLASTPAGE)
- this->badblock_pattern = &lastpage_memorybased;
- else if (this->options & NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE)
- this->badblock_pattern = this->badblockpos ==
- NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS ?
- &smallpage_scan2nd_memorybased :
- &largepage_scan2nd_memorybased;
- else
- this->badblock_pattern = this->badblockpos ==
- NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS ?
- &smallpage_memorybased :
- &largepage_memorybased;
- }
+ if (!this->badblock_pattern)
+ nand_create_default_bbt_descr(this);
}
return nand_scan_bbt(mtd, this->badblock_pattern);
}
diff --git a/include/linux/mtd/bbm.h b/include/linux/mtd/bbm.h
index 8ad0b86..a04b962 100644
--- a/include/linux/mtd/bbm.h
+++ b/include/linux/mtd/bbm.h
@@ -84,6 +84,10 @@ struct nand_bbt_descr {
#define NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE 0x00004000
/* Search good / bad pattern on the last page of the eraseblock */
#define NAND_BBT_SCANLASTPAGE 0x00008000
+/* Chip stores bad block marker on BOTH 1st and 6th bytes of OOB */
+#define NAND_BBT_SCANBYTE1AND6 0x00100000
+/* The nand_bbt_descr was created dynamicaly and must be freed */
+#define NAND_BBT_DYNAMICSTRUCT 0x00200000
/* The maximum number of blocks to scan for a bbt */
#define NAND_BBT_SCAN_MAXBLOCKS 4
--
1.7.0.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] mtd/nand: More BB Detection, dynamic scan options
2010-07-13 22:13 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] mtd/nand: More BB Detection, dynamic scan options Brian Norris
@ 2010-07-13 23:56 ` Brian Norris
2010-07-15 19:15 ` [PATCH v3 " Brian Norris
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Brian Norris @ 2010-07-13 23:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
Cc: Maxim Levitsky, Thomas Gleixner, David Woodhouse, Brian Norris,
Artem Bityutskiy
I have a few comments/questions about the following sections.
On 07/13/2010 03:13 PM, Brian Norris wrote:
> Added new flag for scanning of both bytes 1 and 6 of the OOB for
> a BB marker (instead of simply one or the other).
<snip>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c
> index ec1700e..474ff66 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c
<snip>
> @@ -447,6 +445,24 @@ static int create_bbt(struct mtd_info *mtd, uint8_t *buf,
> if (ret< 0)
> return ret;
>
> + /* Check if we need a second scan for the 6th byte
> + * Perhaps there is a more efficient way of doing this?
> + */
> + if (!ret&& bd->options& NAND_BBT_SCANBYTE1AND6) {
> + bd->offs = NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS;
> + if (bd->options& NAND_BBT_SCANALLPAGES)
> + ret = scan_block_full(mtd, bd, from, buf,
> + readlen, scanlen, len);
> + else
> + ret = scan_block_fast(mtd, bd, from, buf, len);
> +
> + /* Reset offset for future scans */
> + bd->offs = NAND_LARGE_BADBLOCK_POS;
> +
> + if (ret< 0)
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> if (ret) {
> this->bbt[i>> 3] |= 0x03<< (i& 0x6);
> printk(KERN_WARNING "Bad eraseblock %d at 0x%012llx\n",
I realize it's probably not the best practice to just duplicate/modify
the detection code as I did above. I am trying to find the best place to
implement the scanning of both bytes 1 and 6 of the OOB. Perhaps
nand_bbt.c:check_pattern() and check_short_pattern()?
Also, it seems to me that in addition to the main scanning routines, I
should update the nand_default_block_markbad() function in nand_base.c
so that it writes its BB marker to the proper bytes in the OOB. Does
this sound reasonable?
Comments/corrections are appreciated!
Brian
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* [PATCH v3 2/2] mtd/nand: More BB Detection, dynamic scan options
2010-07-13 23:56 ` Brian Norris
@ 2010-07-15 19:15 ` Brian Norris
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Brian Norris @ 2010-07-15 19:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-mtd
Cc: David Woodhouse, Thomas Gleixner, Maxim Levitsky, Brian Norris,
Artem Bityutskiy
This is a revision to PATCH 2/2 that I sent. Link:
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2010-July/030911.html
Added new flag for scanning of both bytes 1 and 6 of the OOB for
a BB marker (instead of simply one or the other).
The "check_pattern" and "check_short_pattern" functions were updated
to include support for scanning the two different locations in the OOB.
In order to handle increases in variety of necessary scanning patterns,
I implemented dynamic memory allocation of nand_bbt_descr structs
in new function 'nand_create_default_bbt_descr()'. This replaces
some increasingly-unwieldy, statically-declared descriptors. It can
replace several more (e.g. "flashbased" structs). However, I do not
test the flashbased options personally.
Signed-off-by: Brian Norris <norris@broadcom.com>
---
drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c | 14 +++++
drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c | 127 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
include/linux/mtd/bbm.h | 4 +
3 files changed, 90 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
index bd69790..c2901bd 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
@@ -2963,6 +2963,15 @@ static struct nand_flash_dev *nand_get_flash_type(struct mtd_info *mtd,
*maf_id == NAND_MFR_MICRON))
chip->options |= NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE;
+ /*
+ * Numonyx/ST 2K pages, x8 bus use BOTH byte 1 and 6
+ */
+ if (!(busw & NAND_BUSWIDTH_16) &&
+ *maf_id == NAND_MFR_STMICRO &&
+ mtd->writesize == 2048) {
+ chip->options |= NAND_BBT_SCANBYTE1AND6;
+ chip->badblockpos = 0;
+ }
/* Check for AND chips with 4 page planes */
if (chip->options & NAND_4PAGE_ARRAY)
@@ -3322,6 +3331,11 @@ void nand_release(struct mtd_info *mtd)
kfree(chip->bbt);
if (!(chip->options & NAND_OWN_BUFFERS))
kfree(chip->buffers);
+
+ /* Free bad block descriptor memory */
+ if (chip->badblock_pattern && chip->badblock_pattern->options
+ & NAND_BBT_DYNAMICSTRUCT)
+ kfree(chip->badblock_pattern);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(nand_lock);
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c
index ec1700e..469de17 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c
@@ -93,6 +93,28 @@ static int check_pattern(uint8_t *buf, int len, int paglen, struct nand_bbt_desc
return -1;
}
+ /* Check both positions 1 and 6 for pattern? */
+ if (td->options & NAND_BBT_SCANBYTE1AND6) {
+ if (td->options & NAND_BBT_SCANEMPTY) {
+ p += td->len;
+ end += NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS - td->offs;
+ /* Check region between positions 1 and 6 */
+ for (i = 0; i < NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS - td->offs - td->len;
+ i++) {
+ if (*p++ != 0xff)
+ return -1;
+ }
+ }
+ else {
+ p += NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS - td->offs;
+ }
+ /* Compare the pattern */
+ for (i = 0; i < td->len; i++) {
+ if (p[i] != td->pattern[i])
+ return -1;
+ }
+ }
+
if (td->options & NAND_BBT_SCANEMPTY) {
p += td->len;
end += td->len;
@@ -124,6 +146,13 @@ static int check_short_pattern(uint8_t *buf, struct nand_bbt_descr *td)
if (p[td->offs + i] != td->pattern[i])
return -1;
}
+ /* Need to check location 1 AND 6? */
+ if (td->options & NAND_BBT_SCANBYTE1AND6) {
+ for (i = 0; i < td->len; i++) {
+ if (p[NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS + i] != td->pattern[i])
+ return -1;
+ }
+ }
return 0;
}
@@ -397,12 +426,10 @@ static int create_bbt(struct mtd_info *mtd, uint8_t *buf,
if (bd->options & NAND_BBT_SCANALLPAGES)
len = 1 << (this->bbt_erase_shift - this->page_shift);
- else {
- if (bd->options & NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE)
- len = 2;
- else
- len = 1;
- }
+ else if (bd->options & NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE)
+ len = 2;
+ else
+ len = 1;
if (!(bd->options & NAND_BBT_SCANEMPTY)) {
/* We need only read few bytes from the OOB area */
@@ -1092,41 +1119,6 @@ int nand_update_bbt(struct mtd_info *mtd, loff_t offs)
* while scanning a device for factory marked good / bad blocks. */
static uint8_t scan_ff_pattern[] = { 0xff, 0xff };
-static struct nand_bbt_descr smallpage_memorybased = {
- .options = 0,
- .offs = NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS,
- .len = 1,
- .pattern = scan_ff_pattern
-};
-
-static struct nand_bbt_descr smallpage_scan2nd_memorybased = {
- .options = NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE,
- .offs = NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS,
- .len = 2,
- .pattern = scan_ff_pattern
-};
-
-static struct nand_bbt_descr largepage_memorybased = {
- .options = 0,
- .offs = NAND_LARGE_BADBLOCK_POS,
- .len = 1,
- .pattern = scan_ff_pattern
-};
-
-static struct nand_bbt_descr largepage_scan2nd_memorybased = {
- .options = NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE,
- .offs = NAND_LARGE_BADBLOCK_POS,
- .len = 2,
- .pattern = scan_ff_pattern
-};
-
-static struct nand_bbt_descr lastpage_memorybased = {
- .options = NAND_BBT_SCANLASTPAGE,
- .offs = 0,
- .len = 1,
- .pattern = scan_ff_pattern
-};
-
static struct nand_bbt_descr smallpage_flashbased = {
.options = NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE,
.offs = NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS,
@@ -1175,6 +1167,43 @@ static struct nand_bbt_descr bbt_mirror_descr = {
.pattern = mirror_pattern
};
+#define BBT_SCAN_OPTIONS (NAND_BBT_SCANLASTPAGE | NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE | \
+ NAND_BBT_SCANBYTE1AND6)
+/**
+ * nand_create_default_bbt_descr - [Internal] Creates a BBT descriptor structure
+ * @this: NAND chip to create descriptor for
+ *
+ * This function allocates and initializes a nand_bbt_descr for BBM detection
+ * based on the properties of "this". The new descriptor is stored in
+ * this->badblock_pattern. Thus, this->badblock_pattern should be NULL when
+ * passed to this function.
+ *
+ * TODO: Handle other flags, replace other static structs
+ * (e.g. handle NAND_BBT_FLASH for flash-based BBT,
+ * replace smallpage_flashbased)
+ *
+ */
+static int nand_create_default_bbt_descr(struct nand_chip *this)
+{
+ struct nand_bbt_descr *bd;
+ if (this->badblock_pattern) {
+ printk(KERN_WARNING "BBT descr already allocated; not replacing.\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+ bd = kzalloc(sizeof(*bd), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!bd) {
+ printk(KERN_ERR "nand_create_default_bbt_descr: Out of memory\n");
+ return -ENOMEM;
+ }
+ bd->options = this->options & BBT_SCAN_OPTIONS;
+ bd->offs = this->badblockpos;
+ bd->len = (this->options & NAND_BUSWIDTH_16) ? 2 : 1;
+ bd->pattern = scan_ff_pattern;
+ bd->options |= NAND_BBT_DYNAMICSTRUCT;
+ this->badblock_pattern = bd;
+ return 0;
+}
+
/**
* nand_default_bbt - [NAND Interface] Select a default bad block table for the device
* @mtd: MTD device structure
@@ -1217,20 +1246,8 @@ int nand_default_bbt(struct mtd_info *mtd)
} else {
this->bbt_td = NULL;
this->bbt_md = NULL;
- if (!this->badblock_pattern) {
- if (this->options & NAND_BBT_SCANLASTPAGE)
- this->badblock_pattern = &lastpage_memorybased;
- else if (this->options & NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE)
- this->badblock_pattern = this->badblockpos ==
- NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS ?
- &smallpage_scan2nd_memorybased :
- &largepage_scan2nd_memorybased;
- else
- this->badblock_pattern = this->badblockpos ==
- NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS ?
- &smallpage_memorybased :
- &largepage_memorybased;
- }
+ if (!this->badblock_pattern)
+ nand_create_default_bbt_descr(this);
}
return nand_scan_bbt(mtd, this->badblock_pattern);
}
diff --git a/include/linux/mtd/bbm.h b/include/linux/mtd/bbm.h
index 8ad0b86..a04b962 100644
--- a/include/linux/mtd/bbm.h
+++ b/include/linux/mtd/bbm.h
@@ -84,6 +84,10 @@ struct nand_bbt_descr {
#define NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE 0x00004000
/* Search good / bad pattern on the last page of the eraseblock */
#define NAND_BBT_SCANLASTPAGE 0x00008000
+/* Chip stores bad block marker on BOTH 1st and 6th bytes of OOB */
+#define NAND_BBT_SCANBYTE1AND6 0x00100000
+/* The nand_bbt_descr was created dynamicaly and must be freed */
+#define NAND_BBT_DYNAMICSTRUCT 0x00200000
/* The maximum number of blocks to scan for a bbt */
#define NAND_BBT_SCAN_MAXBLOCKS 4
--
1.7.0.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Improved BB Scanning
2010-07-13 22:12 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] Improved BB Scanning Brian Norris
2010-07-13 22:13 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] mtd/nand, BB detect: factory marker in page 1, 2, last and byte 1 or 6 Brian Norris
2010-07-13 22:13 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] mtd/nand: More BB Detection, dynamic scan options Brian Norris
@ 2010-07-18 16:38 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-19 19:32 ` Brian Norris
2010-07-21 23:53 ` [PATCH] mtd/nand: Update nand_default_block_markbad() Brian Norris
3 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Artem Bityutskiy @ 2010-07-18 16:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Brian Norris; +Cc: Thomas Gleixner, linux-mtd, David Woodhouse, Maxim Levitsky
On Tue, 2010-07-13 at 15:12 -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
> This is a two-patch correction and update to my previous attempt
> to address a few issues with bad block scanning. Overall, they should
> help renovate some incorrect and unwieldy code.
>
> I included the top few maintainers from get_maintainers.pl. Sorry if these
> were incorrect addressees.
>
> Brian Norris (2):
> mtd/nand, BB detect: factory marker in page 1, 2, last and byte 1 or 6
> mtd/nand: More BB Detection, dynamic scan options
>
> drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++--
> drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c | 89 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
> include/linux/mtd/bbm.h | 4 ++
> 3 files changed, 101 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
I did not _really_ review this, it the patches look good. How did you
test them? Did you test on both large and small page NANDs?
I pushed your patches to my l2-mtd-2.6.git / master
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Improved BB Scanning
2010-07-18 16:38 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] Improved BB Scanning Artem Bityutskiy
@ 2010-07-19 19:32 ` Brian Norris
2010-07-21 9:49 ` Artem Bityutskiy
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Brian Norris @ 2010-07-19 19:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dedekind1@gmail.com
Cc: Thomas Gleixner, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, David Woodhouse,
Maxim Levitsky
On 07/18/2010 09:38 AM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> I did not _really_ review this, it the patches look good. How did you
> test them? Did you test on both large and small page NANDs?
I referenced 30+ data sheets (covering 100+ parts), and I tested a
selection of 10 different chips to varying degrees. Particularly, I
tested the creation of bad-block descriptors and basic BB scanning on
three parts:
ST NAND04GW3B2D, 2K page
ST NAND128W3A, 512B page
Samsung K9F1G08U0A, 2K page
To test these, I wrote some fake bad block markers to the flash (in OOB
bytes 1, 6, and elsewhere) to see if the scanning routine would detect
them properly. However, this method was somewhat limited because the
driver I am using has some bugs in its OOB write functionality.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Improved BB Scanning
2010-07-19 19:32 ` Brian Norris
@ 2010-07-21 9:49 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-22 19:44 ` Karl Beldan
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Artem Bityutskiy @ 2010-07-21 9:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Brian Norris
Cc: Thomas Gleixner, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, David Woodhouse,
Maxim Levitsky
On Mon, 2010-07-19 at 12:32 -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
> On 07/18/2010 09:38 AM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> > I did not _really_ review this, it the patches look good. How did you
> > test them? Did you test on both large and small page NANDs?
>
> I referenced 30+ data sheets (covering 100+ parts), and I tested a
> selection of 10 different chips to varying degrees. Particularly, I
> tested the creation of bad-block descriptors and basic BB scanning on
> three parts:
>
> ST NAND04GW3B2D, 2K page
> ST NAND128W3A, 512B page
> Samsung K9F1G08U0A, 2K page
>
> To test these, I wrote some fake bad block markers to the flash (in OOB
> bytes 1, 6, and elsewhere) to see if the scanning routine would detect
> them properly. However, this method was somewhat limited because the
> driver I am using has some bugs in its OOB write functionality.
Sounds like you did a lot of work. I'll add this information to the
patch description.
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Improved BB Scanning
2010-07-21 9:49 ` Artem Bityutskiy
@ 2010-07-22 19:44 ` Karl Beldan
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Karl Beldan @ 2010-07-22 19:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dedekind1
Cc: Thomas Gleixner, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, David Woodhouse,
Brian Norris, Maxim Levitsky
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 11:49 AM, Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-07-19 at 12:32 -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
>> On 07/18/2010 09:38 AM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
>> > I did not _really_ review this, it the patches look good. How did you
>> > test them? Did you test on both large and small page NANDs?
>>
>> I referenced 30+ data sheets (covering 100+ parts), and I tested a
>> selection of 10 different chips to varying degrees. Particularly, I
>> tested the creation of bad-block descriptors and basic BB scanning on
>> three parts:
>>
>> ST NAND04GW3B2D, 2K page
>> ST NAND128W3A, 512B page
>> Samsung K9F1G08U0A, 2K page
>>
>> To test these, I wrote some fake bad block markers to the flash (in OOB
>> bytes 1, 6, and elsewhere) to see if the scanning routine would detect
>> them properly. However, this method was somewhat limited because the
>> driver I am using has some bugs in its OOB write functionality.
>
> Sounds like you did a lot of work. I'll add this information to the
> patch description.
>
I haven't seen many nandsim feedback, though it allows precise test scenarios
and easy flash forensics.
Still, FWIW, I too laud the effort.
--
Karl
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] mtd/nand: Update nand_default_block_markbad()
2010-07-13 22:12 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] Improved BB Scanning Brian Norris
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2010-07-18 16:38 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] Improved BB Scanning Artem Bityutskiy
@ 2010-07-21 23:53 ` Brian Norris
2010-07-26 4:30 ` Artem Bityutskiy
3 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Brian Norris @ 2010-07-21 23:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Artem Bityutskiy
Cc: Thomas Gleixner, linux-mtd, David Woodhouse, Brian Norris,
Maxim Levitsky
This is an update that depends on the previous patches I sent.
We can now write to all the appropriate BB marker locations (i.e.
pages 1 AND 2, bytes 1 AND 6) with nand_default_block_markbad() if
necessary, according to the flags marked in chip->options.
Note that I removed the line:
ofs += mtd->oobsize;
Unless I am wrong, this line was completely unnecessary in the
first place.
Signed-off-by: Brian Norris <norris@broadcom.com>
---
drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
1 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
index c2901bd..ee6a6f8 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
@@ -397,7 +397,7 @@ static int nand_default_block_markbad(struct mtd_info *mtd, loff_t ofs)
{
struct nand_chip *chip = mtd->priv;
uint8_t buf[2] = { 0, 0 };
- int block, ret;
+ int block, ret, i = 0;
if (chip->options & NAND_BBT_SCANLASTPAGE)
ofs += mtd->erasesize - mtd->writesize;
@@ -411,17 +411,31 @@ static int nand_default_block_markbad(struct mtd_info *mtd, loff_t ofs)
if (chip->options & NAND_USE_FLASH_BBT)
ret = nand_update_bbt(mtd, ofs);
else {
- /* We write two bytes, so we dont have to mess with 16 bit
- * access
- */
nand_get_device(chip, mtd, FL_WRITING);
- ofs += mtd->oobsize;
- chip->ops.len = chip->ops.ooblen = 2;
- chip->ops.datbuf = NULL;
- chip->ops.oobbuf = buf;
- chip->ops.ooboffs = chip->badblockpos & ~0x01;
- ret = nand_do_write_oob(mtd, ofs, &chip->ops);
+ /* Write to first two pages and to byte 1 and 6 if necessary.
+ * If we write to more than one location, the first error
+ * encountered quits the procedure. We write two bytes per
+ * location, so we dont have to mess with 16 bit access.
+ */
+ do {
+ chip->ops.len = chip->ops.ooblen = 2;
+ chip->ops.datbuf = NULL;
+ chip->ops.oobbuf = buf;
+ chip->ops.ooboffs = chip->badblockpos & ~0x01;
+
+ ret = nand_do_write_oob(mtd, ofs, &chip->ops);
+
+ if (!ret && (chip->options & NAND_BBT_SCANBYTE1AND6)) {
+ chip->ops.ooboffs = NAND_SMALL_BADBLOCK_POS
+ & ~0x01;
+ ret = nand_do_write_oob(mtd, ofs, &chip->ops);
+ }
+ i++;
+ ofs += mtd->writesize;
+ } while (!ret && (chip->options & NAND_BBT_SCAN2NDPAGE) &&
+ i < 2);
+
nand_release_device(mtd);
}
if (!ret)
--
1.7.0.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] mtd/nand: Update nand_default_block_markbad()
2010-07-21 23:53 ` [PATCH] mtd/nand: Update nand_default_block_markbad() Brian Norris
@ 2010-07-26 4:30 ` Artem Bityutskiy
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Artem Bityutskiy @ 2010-07-26 4:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Brian Norris; +Cc: Thomas Gleixner, linux-mtd, David Woodhouse, Maxim Levitsky
On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 16:53 -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
> This is an update that depends on the previous patches I sent.
>
> We can now write to all the appropriate BB marker locations (i.e.
> pages 1 AND 2, bytes 1 AND 6) with nand_default_block_markbad() if
> necessary, according to the flags marked in chip->options.
>
> Note that I removed the line:
> ofs += mtd->oobsize;
> Unless I am wrong, this line was completely unnecessary in the
> first place.
>
> Signed-off-by: Brian Norris <norris@broadcom.com>
Pushed to mtd-2.6.git / master, thanks.
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread