From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
To: Stefan Agner <stefan@agner.ch>
Cc: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: nand_op_parser_exec_op should use longest pattern
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2019 23:30:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190408233027.7caa1281@xps13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <270be087c7dda47f208d194c0671f902@agner.ch>
Hi Stefan,
Stefan Agner <stefan@agner.ch> wrote on Mon, 08 Apr 2019 22:00:18 +0200:
> Hi Boris,
>
> On 30.03.2019 10:21, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> > +Miquel
> >
> > On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 15:37:56 +0100
> > Stefan Agner <stefan@agner.ch> wrote:
> >
> >> On 29.03.2019 14:35, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> >> > Hi All,
> >> >
> >> > I just played with the new exec_op interface for the first time and
> >> > together with Boris we found a problem in the pattern table parser.
> >> >
> >> > The vf610 driver uses this pattern table:
> >> >
> >> > static const struct nand_op_parser vf610_nfc_op_parser = NAND_OP_PARSER(
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PATTERN(vf610_nfc_cmd,
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_CMD_ELEM(true),
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_ADDR_ELEM(true, 5),
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_DATA_OUT_ELEM(true, PAGE_2K + OOB_MAX),
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_CMD_ELEM(true),
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_WAITRDY_ELEM(true)),
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PATTERN(vf610_nfc_cmd,
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_CMD_ELEM(true),
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_ADDR_ELEM(true, 5),
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_CMD_ELEM(true),
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_WAITRDY_ELEM(true),
> >> > NAND_OP_PARSER_PAT_DATA_IN_ELEM(true, PAGE_2K + OOB_MAX)),
> >> > );
> >> >
> >> > It has two patterns, one supposed for writing and one for reading. All elements
> >> > are optional. Now with a typical page read we'll get this:
> >> >
> >> > [ 33.932464] nand: ->CMD [0x00]
> >> > [ 33.936338] nand: ->ADDR [5 cyc: 00 00 00 0a 00]
> >> > [ 33.941755] nand: ->CMD [0x30]
> >> > [ 33.945628] nand: ->WAITRDY [max 1 ms]
> >> > [ 33.949909] nand: DATA_IN [2176 B]
>
> Hm, since I use HW ECC (which uses custom function calls), I do not get
> such large data reads. But I do have OOB reads from time to time:
>
> [ 4.603585] nand: executing subop:
> [ 4.603616] nand: ->CMD [0x00]
> [ 4.603646] nand: ->ADDR [5 cyc: 00 08 ea 94 02]
> [ 4.603673] nand: ->CMD [0x30]
> [ 4.603700] nand: ->WAITRDY [max 200000 ms]
> [ 4.603727] nand: DATA_IN [64 B]
> [ 4.603881] nand: executing subop:
> [ 4.603912] nand: CMD [0x00]
> [ 4.603941] nand: ADDR [5 cyc: 00 08 ea 94 02]
> [ 4.603968] nand: CMD [0x30]
> [ 4.603994] nand: WAITRDY [max 200000 ms]
> [ 4.604022] nand: ->DATA_IN [64 B]
>
>
>
> >> >
> >> > Only the first four elements are executed in one go, the fifth is
> >> > exectuted separately. This is because the pattern table parser finds
> >> > that the first pattern (supposed for writing) already matches for the
> >> > first four elements and then uses it instead of realizing that the
> >> > second pattern matches the whole operation.
> >>
> >> Hm, I do not remember noticing that during development. I wonder if it
> >> was the case already back then.
> >>
> >> If yes, it did not seem to have a negative impact on performance
> >> compared to the old interface:
> >> https://linux-mtd.infradead.narkive.com/qZgEnPsC/patch-v6-0-3-mtd-rawnand-vf610-nfc-make-use-of-exec-op
> >>
> >> >
> >> > I have no fix for this, just wanted to let you know. It turned out that
> >> > in my case for the GPMI nand driver I probably won't need any pattern
> >> > table.
> >>
> >> Thanks for bringing it up! Will try it out when I come around.
> >
> > Here is a new version of the proposed fix that compiles, at
> > least :-). Still not tested tested on a real HW though.
>
> Tested it here, seems to boot a rootfs from flash just fine!
>
> The OOB reads look like this now:
> [ 74.478469] nand: executing subop:
> [ 74.478500] nand: ->CMD [0x00]
> [ 74.478529] nand: ->ADDR [5 cyc: 00 08 c0 1d 00]
> [ 74.478555] nand: ->CMD [0x30]
> [ 74.478580] nand: ->WAITRDY [max 200000 ms]
> [ 74.478606] nand: ->DATA_IN [64 B]
>
> So the patch below seems to do what we intend.
Great! Stefan, I know Boris is busy, can you please send the patch?
Thanks!
Miquèl
______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-08 21:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-29 13:35 nand_op_parser_exec_op should use longest pattern Sascha Hauer
2019-03-29 13:57 ` Boris Brezillon
2019-03-29 14:37 ` Stefan Agner
2019-03-30 9:21 ` Boris Brezillon
2019-04-08 20:00 ` Stefan Agner
2019-04-08 21:30 ` Miquel Raynal [this message]
2019-04-16 21:22 ` Miquel Raynal
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=20190408233027.7caa1281@xps13 \
--to=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
--cc=boris.brezillon@collabora.com \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
--cc=stefan@agner.ch \
/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