From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lazybastard.de ([212.112.238.170] helo=longford.lazybastard.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.68 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1J4fpo-00052i-Er for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 17:02:30 +0000 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 17:56:49 +0100 From: =?utf-8?B?SsO2cm4=?= Engel To: David Brown Subject: Re: Limited support of NAND features in MTD. Message-ID: <20071218165648.GH1741@lazybastard.org> References: <20071218142335.GD1741@lazybastard.org> <20071218151800.GG1741@lazybastard.org> <20071218165758.GA11634@old.davidb.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20071218165758.GA11634@old.davidb.org> Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, =?utf-8?B?SsO2cm4=?= Engel , dwmw2@infradead.org, Alexey Korolev List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 18 December 2007 08:57:58 -0800, David Brown wrote: > > One problem with the on-chip copy is that ECC doesn't get corrected. If > there are errors on readback, it will get written that way, and errors > would accumulate. Ouch! Such an implementation would indeed make this whole business pointless. > It is conceivable that the controller could do something intermediary, such > as read the data, and if the ECC needs no correction, write from the > on-chip cache, otherwise write the corrected data. Yes, something like that would be necessary. Jörn -- To my face you have the audacity to advise me to become a thief - the worst kind of thief that is conceivable, a thief of spiritual things, a thief of ideas! It is insufferable, intolerable! -- M. Binet in Scarabouche