public inbox for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matthieu CASTET <matthieu.castet@parrot.com>
To: "Gupta, Pekon" <pekon@ti.com>
Cc: "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mtd: nand: support BENAND (Built-in ECC NAND)
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 10:24:22 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <512B2DC6.8090104@parrot.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20980858CB6D3A4BAE95CA194937D5E73E99A025@DBDE01.ent.ti.com>

Gupta, Pekon a écrit :
> Hi,
> 
>> This enables support for BENAND, which is an SLC NAND flash solution
>> with embedded error correction code (ECC), currently supports only
>> 128bytes OOB type.
>>
>> In the read sequence, "status read command" is executed to check the
>> ECC status after read data. If bitflips occur, these are
>> automatically corrected by BENAND and the status indicates the result.
>>
>> The write sequence is the same as raw write and the ECC data are
>> automatically written to OOB by BENAND.
> 
> Just inquisitive, can anyone please share any throughput comparison between 'BENAND' & 'normal NAND' devices having same capacity and working on same clock-freq ?
> 
> (a) Usually on-chip memory controllers work on faster clock frequencies, as compared to the NAND devices connected to them externally on board.
> Thus I assume, ECC computation & correction can be done at faster rate.
> 
> (b) However, on other hand BENAND(s) have luxury of accessing the Flash storage array locally, thus eliminating I/O delays | un-optimized IO signal timing from the access-path.
> 
> So, if you can share the details throughput comparison between the two types of NAND devices, under various conditions it would be helpful.
> 
You always have to transfer the data from/to the nand devices to/from the host.

- Either the ecc internal controller is fast and the throughput are the same
than 'normal nand' (assuming the ecc controller on the host is fast),
- either it is slow and the throughput is limited by the internal ecc controller
(throughput is slower than 'normal nand')


Matthieu

  reply	other threads:[~2013-02-25  9:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-02-21  6:17 [PATCH v2] mtd: nand: support BENAND (Built-in ECC NAND) katsuki.uwatoko
2013-02-21  9:50 ` Matthieu CASTET
2013-02-22  6:23   ` katsuki.uwatoko
2013-02-25  9:06 ` Gupta, Pekon
2013-02-25  9:24   ` Matthieu CASTET [this message]
2013-02-25  9:38     ` Gupta, Pekon
2013-02-25 10:18       ` Ricard Wanderlof
2013-02-25 11:10         ` Matthieu CASTET
2013-02-25 11:35           ` Gupta, Pekon
2013-02-26  2:41       ` katsuki.uwatoko
2013-03-11  8:57 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2013-03-18  2:40   ` katsuki.uwatoko

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=512B2DC6.8090104@parrot.com \
    --to=matthieu.castet@parrot.com \
    --cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=pekon@ti.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