From: Werner Almesberger <werner@openmoko.org>
To: Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org>
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Ben Dooks <ben@trinity.fluff.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nand_read_subpage vs. S3C244x NAND: non-word reads
Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2008 14:11:48 -0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081101161148.GN31758@almesberger.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081101124634.GB11063@fluff.org.uk>
Ben Dooks wrote:
> As noted on the openmoko list,
Sorry for starting two threads on the same topic. The joy of trying
to do the right thing with lists that don't let you cross-post unless
you're subscribed ...
> I think we can do 256byte subpage reads
> as long as they are aligned to 256bytes. We could make the ECC code
> deal with non-256 byte power-of-two aligned blocks without huge
> changes but my belief is that we cannot support anything that isn't
> a power of two.
In this case, the problem is a bit more subtle: the data blocks
retrieved are perfectly normal, i.e., 256 bytes in size and
properly aligned.
However, nand_read_subpage optimizes retrieval of the OOB data.
So instead of retrieving, say, 64 bytes, it only retrieves 24
(for a 2048 bytes page). Sometimes, not the entire page is
retrieved, and then we get those accesses with an odd size.
> I think the best thing to do is to either force the caller to read
> a power of two (pref. >4 bytes), so either we need some form of flag
> to say this, or change the behaviour of the callers to never try this.
If it's considered generally objectionable to call read_buf for
an amount of data that isn't a whole number of words, those two
approaches would work as well. Making nand_read_subpage align to
4 bytes instead of 1/2 would be fairly simple. A flag would be a
bit messier.
- Werner
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-01 16:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-01 3:15 [PATCH] nand_read_subpage vs. S3C244x NAND: non-word reads Werner Almesberger
2008-11-01 12:46 ` Ben Dooks
2008-11-01 16:11 ` Werner Almesberger [this message]
2008-11-02 12:27 ` Ben Dooks
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=20081101161148.GN31758@almesberger.net \
--to=werner@openmoko.org \
--cc=ben-linux@fluff.org \
--cc=ben@trinity.fluff.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox