From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
To: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
Cc: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>,
Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>,
Bean Huo <beanhuo@micron.com>,
Peter Pan <peterpandong@micron.com>,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mtd: rawnand: Do not check FAIL bit when executing a SET_FEATURES op
Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 08:55:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180518085547.0384f405@bbrezillon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180511124407.7314-1-boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
On Fri, 11 May 2018 14:44:07 +0200
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com> wrote:
> The ONFI spec clearly says that FAIL bit is only valid for PROGRAM,
> ERASE and READ-with-on-die-ECC operations, and should be ignored
> otherwise.
>
> It seems that checking it after sending a SET_FEATURES is a bad idea
> because a previous READ, PROGRAM or ERASE op may have failed, and
> depending on the implementation, the FAIL bit is not cleared until a
> new READ, PROGRAM or ERASE is started.
>
> This leads to ->set_features() returning -EIO while it actually worked,
> which can sometimes stop a batch of READ/PROGRAM ops.
>
> Note that we only fix the ->exec_op() path here, because some drivers
> are abusing the NAND_STATUS_FAIL flag in their ->waitfunc()
> implementation to propagate other kind of errors, like
> wait-ready-timeout or controller-related errors. Let's not try to fix
> those drivers since they worked fine so far.
>
> Fixes: 8878b126df76 ("mtd: nand: add ->exec_op() implementation")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Applied to nand/next.
> ---
> This patch is fixing a problem we had with on-die ECC on Micron
> NANDs [1].
> On these chips, when you have an ECC failure, the FAIL bit is set and
> it's not cleared until the next READ operation, which led the following
> SET_FEATURES (used to re-enable on-die ECC) to fail with -EIO and
> stopped the batch of page reads started by UBIFS, which in turn led to
> unmountable FS.
>
> [1]http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/907874/
>
> Changes in v2:
> - Fix the subject prefix
> ---
> drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c | 27 +++++++++------------------
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c
> index f28c3a555861..ee29f34562ab 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c
> @@ -2174,7 +2174,6 @@ static int nand_set_features_op(struct nand_chip *chip, u8 feature,
> struct mtd_info *mtd = nand_to_mtd(chip);
> const u8 *params = data;
> int i, ret;
> - u8 status;
>
> if (chip->exec_op) {
> const struct nand_sdr_timings *sdr =
> @@ -2188,26 +2187,18 @@ static int nand_set_features_op(struct nand_chip *chip, u8 feature,
> };
> struct nand_operation op = NAND_OPERATION(instrs);
>
> - ret = nand_exec_op(chip, &op);
> - if (ret)
> - return ret;
> -
> - ret = nand_status_op(chip, &status);
> - if (ret)
> - return ret;
> - } else {
> - chip->cmdfunc(mtd, NAND_CMD_SET_FEATURES, feature, -1);
> - for (i = 0; i < ONFI_SUBFEATURE_PARAM_LEN; ++i)
> - chip->write_byte(mtd, params[i]);
> + return nand_exec_op(chip, &op);
> + }
>
> - ret = chip->waitfunc(mtd, chip);
> - if (ret < 0)
> - return ret;
> + chip->cmdfunc(mtd, NAND_CMD_SET_FEATURES, feature, -1);
> + for (i = 0; i < ONFI_SUBFEATURE_PARAM_LEN; ++i)
> + chip->write_byte(mtd, params[i]);
>
> - status = ret;
> - }
> + ret = chip->waitfunc(mtd, chip);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
>
> - if (status & NAND_STATUS_FAIL)
> + if (ret & NAND_STATUS_FAIL)
> return -EIO;
>
> return 0;
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-18 6:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-11 12:44 [PATCH v2] mtd: rawnand: Do not check FAIL bit when executing a SET_FEATURES op Boris Brezillon
2018-05-14 8:54 ` Miquel Raynal
2018-05-18 6:55 ` Boris Brezillon [this message]
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=20180518085547.0384f405@bbrezillon \
--to=boris.brezillon@bootlin.com \
--cc=beanhuo@micron.com \
--cc=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=marek.vasut@gmail.com \
--cc=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
--cc=peterpandong@micron.com \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).