From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 13:27:13 -0600
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] fsmc: Skip BBT scan for bad block management
In-Reply-To: <089c80c399ab4e2db2cfe3efcb31e1ca3fcf62b0.1354778423.git.vipin.kumar@st.com>
	(from vipin.kumar@st.com on Thu Dec  6 01:21:28 2012)
Message-ID: <1354822033.8062.10@snotra>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

On 12/06/2012 01:21:28 AM, Vipin Kumar wrote:
> This patch forces to read the bad block marker from location 0 in  
> large page
> nand devices and location 5 in small page devices.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vipin Kumar <vipin.kumar@st.com>
> Reviewed-by: Shiraz Hashim <shiraz.hashim@st.com>
> ---
>  drivers/mtd/nand/fsmc_nand.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/fsmc_nand.c  
> b/drivers/mtd/nand/fsmc_nand.c
> index 7a61d88..bce4298 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/fsmc_nand.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/fsmc_nand.c
> @@ -433,7 +433,7 @@ int fsmc_nand_init(struct nand_chip *nand)
>  	writel(FSMC_THIZ_1 | FSMC_THOLD_4 | FSMC_TWAIT_6 | FSMC_TSET_0,
>  			&fsmc_regs_p->attrib);
> 
> -	nand->options = 0;
> +	nand->options = NAND_SKIP_BBTSCAN;
>  #if defined(CONFIG_SYS_FSMC_NAND_16BIT)
>  	nand->options |= NAND_BUSWIDTH_16;
>  #endif

I don't think this will change the bad block marker behavior -- just  
whether you use a BBT.  Why do you need this?  Why not  
NAND_USE_FLASH_BBT instead?

-Scott