From: Roger Quadros <rogerq@ti.com>
To: "Gupta, Pekon" <pekon@ti.com>,
"tony@atomide.com" <tony@atomide.com>,
"computersforpeace@gmail.com" <computersforpeace@gmail.com>
Cc: "javier@dowhile0.org" <javier@dowhile0.org>,
"ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com"
<ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com>,
"dwmw2@infradead.org" <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
"jg1.han@samsung.com" <jg1.han@samsung.com>,
"Nori, Sekhar" <nsekhar@ti.com>,
"linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 02/10] mtd: nand: omap: Always use chip->ecc.steps for BCH sector count
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 14:51:31 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53BFCFC3.1090402@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20980858CB6D3A4BAE95CA194937D5E73EB01F7E@DBDE04.ent.ti.com>
On 07/11/2014 02:27 PM, Gupta, Pekon wrote:
>> From: Quadros, Roger
>>> On 07/11/2014 10:43 AM, Gupta, Pekon wrote:
>>>> From: Quadros, Roger
> [...]
>
>>>> @@ -1176,6 +1172,7 @@ static int __maybe_unused omap_calculate_ecc_bch(struct mtd_info
>> *mtd,
>>>> {
>>>> struct omap_nand_info *info = container_of(mtd, struct omap_nand_info,
>>>> mtd);
>>>> + struct nand_chip *chip = mtd->priv;
>>>> int eccbytes = info->nand.ecc.bytes;
>>>> struct gpmc_nand_regs *gpmc_regs = &info->reg;
>>>> u8 *ecc_code;
>>>> @@ -1183,7 +1180,7 @@ static int __maybe_unused omap_calculate_ecc_bch(struct mtd_info
>> *mtd,
>>>> u32 val;
>>>> int i, j;
>>>>
>>>> - nsectors = ((readl(info->reg.gpmc_ecc_config) >> 4) & 0x7) + 1;
>>>> + nsectors = chip->ecc.steps;
>>>
>>> Sorry NAK.. I'm sure you are breaking something here :-)
>>>
>>> NAND driver supports multiple ECC schemes like;
>>> OMAP_ECC_CODE_HAM1_HW (support for legacy reasons)
>>> OMAP_ECC_CODE_BCH4_HW_DETECTION_SW (needed for OMAP3 and AM35xx)
>>> OMAP_ECC_CODE_BCH4_HW
>>> OMAP_ECC_CODE_BCH8_HW
>>> OMAP_ECC_CODE_BCH8_HW_DETECTION_SW (needed for OMAP3 and AM35xx)
>>> OMAP_ECC_CODE_BCH16_HW
>>>
>>> IIRC ..
>>> - software based ecc-schemes OMAP_ECC_CODE_BCHx_HW_DETECTION_SW
>>> Reads/Write in per-sector granularity. (here nsector != chip->ecc.steps)
>>
>> OK. I still don't have a full understanding about the ECC schemes so to ensure we
>> don't break anything I can just leave nsectors as it is and probably just store a
>> copy of it in omap_nand_info to avoid reading it back from gpmc_ecc_config.
>>
>> I still have a few questions to clarify my understanding.
>>
>> The only difference between OMAP_ECC_CODE_BCHx_HW_DETECTION_SW and
>> OMAP_ECC_CODE_BCHx_HW is that in the former the _correction_ is done by software
>> and in the latter the _correction_ is done by hardware (i.e. ELM module).
>> In both cases the _detection_ is done by the same hardware IP via ecc.calculate(),
>> i.e. omap_calculate_ecc_bch().
>>
>> so why should nsector be different for both in the _detection_ stage?
>>
> Again IIRC, That is because of ELM driver.
> ELM hardware engine has 8 channels with each of them having 512Bytes capacity.
> Now, there can be two approaches:
> (1) SECTOR_MODE: Process only one sector of 512 bytes at a time, and iterate
> chip->ecc.steps times.
> (2) PAGE_MODE: Process complete page at a time, enabling multiple channels
> simultaneously. This improves some throughput, especially for large-page
> NAND devices and MLC NAND where bit-flips are common.
>
> As ELM uses (2)nd approach, so the GPMC also has to calculate and store
> ECC for complete page at a time. That is why trace NAND driver you will find
> - OMAP_ECC_CODE_BCHx_HW_DETECTION_SW use generic implementation
> chip->ecc.read_page= nand_read_page_hwecc() defined in nand_base.c
> whereas,
> - OMAP_ECC_CODE_BCHx_HW use custom implementation
> chip->ecc.read_page= omap_read_page_bch() defined in omap.c
>
>
>> An I right that ecc_steps is nothing but number of sub-blocks ECC calculation and correction
>> needs to be done for larger pages. This is a function of ECC hw capability (chip->ecc.size)
>> and NAND flash capability (mtd->writesize). i.e. ecc_steps = mtd->writesize / chip->ecc.size
>>
>> We hardcode chip->ecc.size to 512 for all the ECC schemes in omap_nand_probe() so
>> calculate and correct will always be called for 512 byte sized blocks. So when does
>> the usecase for nsector > 1 come in?
>>
> Ok.. I'll try to explain above details again in probably simplified version
> - OMAP_ECC_CODE_BCHx_HW_DETECTION_SW
> uses lib/bch.c (via nand_bch.c) to correct ECC. And is generic implementation
> so here each sector (data chunk of ecc_size) is corrected independently.
> So nsector = 1;
>
> - OMAP_ECC_CODE_BCHx_HW
> Uses ELM to correct ECC. But the way ELM driver is written today. It corrects
> the whole page in single go. Not individual sectors (ecc_size chunks).
Then shouldn't chip->ecc.size be equal page size and chip->ecc.steps be equal to 1 for upto 4KB pages?
For larger pages it can be a multiple of 4KB page size. i.e. 2 for 8KB, 4 for 16KB and so on.
So nsectors is not necessarily equal to ecc.steps but equal to how many 512 byte blocks are there in
one step. i.e. [min(4096, page_size) / 512]. And it must be local to omap NAND driver.
> So, its doable to make it same like OMAP_ECC_CODE_BCHx_HW_DETECTION_SW
> But then you _may_ have performance penalty for new technology NAND and MLC
> NAND on which bit-flips are very common.
> So to keep ELM driver as it is (performance tweaked), we use different
> configurations in GPMC to read complete page in single go. This is where
> nsector = chip->ecc.steps;
>
> Hope that clarifies the implementation..
>
> Good to document this detail somewhere for OMAP drivers both (u-boot and kernel).
> Any thoughts ?
Sure. we have the processors wiki. That should be a good place.
cheers,
-roger
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-11 11:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-09 12:37 [RFC PATCH 00/10] OMAP: GPMC: NAND: Introduce GPMC APIs for OMAP NAND Roger Quadros
2014-07-09 12:37 ` [RFC PATCH 01/10] mtd: nand: omap: Use a single hardware controller instance Roger Quadros
2014-07-09 12:37 ` [RFC PATCH 02/10] mtd: nand: omap: Always use chip->ecc.steps for BCH sector count Roger Quadros
2014-07-11 7:43 ` Gupta, Pekon
2014-07-11 10:35 ` Roger Quadros
2014-07-11 11:27 ` Gupta, Pekon
2014-07-11 11:51 ` Roger Quadros [this message]
2014-07-09 12:37 ` [RFC PATCH 03/10] OMAP: GPMC: Introduce APIs to access NAND control registers Roger Quadros
2014-07-09 12:37 ` [RFC PATCH 04/10] mtd: nand: omap: Use GPMC APIs for NAND control Roger Quadros
2014-07-09 12:37 ` [RFC PATCH 05/10] OMAP: GPMC: Introduce APIs for accessing Prefetch/Write-post engine Roger Quadros
2014-07-09 12:37 ` [RFC PATCH 06/10] mtd: nand: omap: Use GPMC APIs for accessing Prefetch engine Roger Quadros
2014-07-09 12:37 ` [RFC PATCH 07/10] OMAP: GPMC: Introduce APIs for Configuring ECC Engine Roger Quadros
2014-07-11 7:54 ` Gupta, Pekon
2014-07-09 12:37 ` [RFC PATCH 08/10] OMAP: GPMC: Introduce APIs to get ECC/BCH results Roger Quadros
2014-07-09 12:37 ` [RFC PATCH 09/10] mtd: nand: omap: Use GPMC APIs for accessing ECC/BCH engine Roger Quadros
2014-07-11 7:56 ` Gupta, Pekon
2014-07-09 12:37 ` [RFC PATCH 10/10] OMAP: GPMC: NAND: Don't pass NAND/ECC/BCH register adresses to NAND driver Roger Quadros
2014-07-11 6:52 ` [RFC PATCH 00/10] OMAP: GPMC: NAND: Introduce GPMC APIs for OMAP NAND Tony Lindgren
2014-07-11 7:27 ` Gupta, Pekon
2014-07-11 8:28 ` Roger Quadros
2014-07-11 9:42 ` Gupta, Pekon
2014-07-11 10:23 ` Roger Quadros
2014-07-29 10:39 ` Tony Lindgren
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=53BFCFC3.1090402@ti.com \
--to=rogerq@ti.com \
--cc=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com \
--cc=javier@dowhile0.org \
--cc=jg1.han@samsung.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nsekhar@ti.com \
--cc=pekon@ti.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