public inbox for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
To: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>
Cc: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>,
	Ricard Wanderlof <ricard.wanderlof@axis.com>,
	Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
	Steve deRosier <derosier@gmail.com>, Josh Wu <josh.wu@atmel.com>,
	"linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>,
	Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar>,
	Huang Shijie <shijie8@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: nand: default bitflip-reporting threshold to 75% of correction strength
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 14:50:30 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150210145030.5987fa63@bbrezillon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150121094257.6c9d6214@bbrezillon>

On Wed, 21 Jan 2015 09:42:57 +0100
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> wrote:

> Hi Brian,
> 
> On Wed, 21 Jan 2015 00:22:57 -0800
> Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com> wrote:

[...]

> 
> > 
> > > Regarding the read-retry code, it currently stops retrying reading the
> > > page once the page has been successfully retrieved (or in other terms
> > > all bitflips have been fixed). But it might stop to soon, because by
> > > changing the bit level threshold (in other term retrying one more time)
> > > it might successfully read the page with less bitflips than the
> > > previous attempt (these are just supposition, I haven't tested it yet).
> > > If we can achieve that we could retry until we reach something below
> > > the bitflips threshold value, and if we fail to find any, just consider
> > > the lower number of bitflips found during those read-retry operations.
> > 
> > I believe I suggested scenarios like this to some flash vendors when
> > speaking to reps in person, but they didn't seem to consider that
> > likely. I think they were implying that there would be only one read
> > retry mode that gives a reasonable result. I'm not sure if they were
> > really the experts on that particular topic, though, or if they were
> > just giving me an answer to make me happy.
> 
> Okay, good to know. I'll try to do some more testing to verify that.

I did some more test on my cubietruck, trying other read-retry if the
threshold limit is reached (here is the code [1]), and it seems that
better read-retry mode are found in most cases (actually in all the
cases I encountered: see those traces [2]).

Note that I configured the bitflips_threshold to 3/4 of the
ecc-strength (exactly what you're doing in this patch).

Given these results I really think we should consider testing other
'read modes' if the succeeding one exceed the threshold value.

Best Regards,

Boris

[1]http://code.bulix.org/lvcs9x-87859
[2]http://code.bulix.org/xii8nw-87860

-- 
Boris Brezillon, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com

  reply	other threads:[~2015-02-10 13:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-01-08  3:10 NAND ECC capabilities Steve deRosier
2015-01-08  4:17 ` Ezequiel Garcia
2015-01-08  6:22   ` Steve deRosier
     [not found]     ` <0D23F1ECC880A74392D56535BCADD73526C0EA9A@NTXBOIMBX03.micron.com>
2015-01-08 17:09       ` Steve deRosier
2015-01-08 18:57         ` Brian Norris
2015-01-08  8:32 ` Ricard Wanderlof
2015-01-08 16:42   ` Ezequiel Garcia
2015-01-08 17:26     ` Steve deRosier
2015-01-08 19:09     ` Brian Norris
2015-01-08 19:27       ` Ezequiel Garcia
2015-01-12  8:35       ` Josh Wu
2015-01-12 20:51         ` [PATCH] mtd: nand: default bitflip-reporting threshold to 75% of correction strength Brian Norris
2015-01-13  2:01           ` Huang Shijie
2015-01-13  2:38             ` Brian Norris
2015-01-13  2:56               ` Huang Shijie
2015-01-13 13:25           ` Richard Weinberger
2015-01-13 18:48             ` Brian Norris
2015-01-13 18:51               ` Richard Weinberger
2015-01-13 19:51                 ` Brian Norris
2015-01-17 19:01           ` Boris Brezillon
2015-01-17 19:26             ` Richard Weinberger
2015-01-17 19:42               ` Boris Brezillon
2015-01-17 19:54                 ` Richard Weinberger
2015-01-21  8:22             ` Brian Norris
2015-01-21  8:42               ` Boris Brezillon
2015-02-10 13:50                 ` Boris Brezillon [this message]
2015-01-21  7:45           ` Brian Norris
2015-01-08 17:14   ` NAND ECC capabilities Steve deRosier

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=20150210145030.5987fa63@bbrezillon \
    --to=boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com \
    --cc=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
    --cc=derosier@gmail.com \
    --cc=ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar \
    --cc=josh.wu@atmel.com \
    --cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=ricard.wanderlof@axis.com \
    --cc=richard@nod.at \
    --cc=shijie8@gmail.com \
    /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