From: Mike Dunn <mikedunn@newsguy.com>
To: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
Cc: "Thomas Petazzoni" <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>,
"Brian Norris" <computersforpeace@gmail.com>,
"Ezequiel Garcia" <ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com>,
"Enric Balletbo Serra" <eballetbo@gmail.com>,
"linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>,
"Gupta, Pekon" <pekon@ti.com>,
"Peter Meerwald" <pmeerw@pmeerw.net>,
"Javier Martinez Canillas" <javier@dowhile0.org>,
"linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
"Andreas Bießmann" <andreas.biessmann@corscience.de>
Subject: Re: OMAP3 NAND ECC selection
Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2013 12:59:59 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52A4DDCF.60400@newsguy.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131205193834.GJ26766@atomide.com>
On 12/05/2013 11:38 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> [131205 11:33]:
>> Dear Brian Norris,
>>
>> On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 11:24:18 -0800, Brian Norris wrote:
>>
>>>> The long term benefits is simply to properly handle the hardware
>>>> constraints. We have hardware platforms were parts of the NAND *MUST*
>>>> use 1-bit ECC to be compatible with the ROM code, and other parts of
>>>> the NAND *MUST* use stronger 4-bits or 8-bits ECC to comply with the
>>>> NAND requirements.
>>>
>>> Using 1-bit ECC on NAND is not a long-term solution. Given that fact,
>>> I think your ROM code is what may need to change, not the entire MTD
>>> subsystem.
>>
>> As someone (Tom Rini maybe?) pointed out, today the shift is 1-bit ECC
>> supported by ROM code vs. 4 or 8 bits required by NAND. But we can very
>> well imagine that tomorrow ROM code will support BCH4 (and the NAND
>> will ensure block 0 is OK for use with BCH4) but the rest of the NAND
>> will require BCH16 or something like that.
>>
>> I'm not designing ROM code, and the fact that they today have this
>> limitation, should be an indication that Linux should be capable of
>> handling different ECC schemes to handle those hardware constraints.
>
> Yeah and it seems that for the bootloader partition we need to be able
> to specify the ECC scheme in the .dts file to avoid having people trash
> their system unless they really want to do it.
>
> /me at least has rebooted and reflashed way too many times unnecessarily
> while trying to update MLO or u-boot from the kernel.
The M-Sys/Sandisk docg4 flash chip has a similiar issue, but is even more
esoteric than merely a different ecc scheme for the SPL/u-boot partition. Not
only is a different ecc scheme used for the SPL (actually it uses no ecc at
all), but the flash controller must be placed into a special (proprietary) mode
("reliable mode") before the SPL is written. Like the omap2 solution, the docg4
driver can be loaded with a special module parameter that enables writing the
SPL partition in this mode.
The docg4 is kind of a special case, though, because it is a nand flash wrapped
inside a proprietary non-standard flash controller.
Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-08 21:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-05 9:13 OMAP3 NAND ECC selection Peter Meerwald
2013-12-05 9:47 ` Enric Balletbo Serra
2013-12-05 9:59 ` Andreas Bießmann
2013-12-05 16:12 ` Peter Meerwald
2013-12-05 17:13 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-12-05 17:39 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2013-12-05 18:26 ` Ezequiel Garcia
2013-12-05 18:58 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2013-12-05 19:02 ` Gupta, Pekon
2013-12-05 19:06 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-12-05 19:24 ` Brian Norris
2013-12-05 19:32 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-12-05 19:38 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-12-08 20:59 ` Mike Dunn [this message]
2013-12-09 4:33 ` Gupta, Pekon
2013-12-09 11:06 ` Matthieu CASTET
2013-12-09 11:50 ` Gupta, Pekon
2013-12-05 19:13 ` Brian Norris
2013-12-06 17:35 ` Andreas Bießmann
2013-12-06 14:54 ` Peter Meerwald
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=52A4DDCF.60400@newsguy.com \
--to=mikedunn@newsguy.com \
--cc=andreas.biessmann@corscience.de \
--cc=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
--cc=eballetbo@gmail.com \
--cc=ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com \
--cc=javier@dowhile0.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pekon@ti.com \
--cc=pmeerw@pmeerw.net \
--cc=thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com \
--cc=tony@atomide.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