From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=F6rg?= Krause Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 13:38:56 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mxs_nand: Fix ECC strength for NAND flash with OOB size of 256 In-Reply-To: <552B85DA.2090503@denx.de> References: <1428826652-314-1-git-send-email-hs@denx.de> <1428914386.26500.5.camel@embedded.rocks> <201504131042.02552.marex@denx.de> <552B85DA.2090503@denx.de> Message-ID: <1428925136.8695.17.camel@embedded.rocks> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hi Marek, Heiko, On Mo, 2015-04-13 at 11:01 +0200, Heiko Schocher wrote: > Hello Marek, Joerg, > > Am 13.04.2015 10:42, schrieb Marek Vasut: > > On Monday, April 13, 2015 at 10:39:46 AM, J?rg Krause wrote: > > > Hi Heiko, > > > > > > On So, 2015-04-12 at 10:17 +0200, Heiko Schocher wrote: > > > > On the i.mx6 based aristainetos2 board a Toshiba > > > > TH58NYG3S0HBAI4 > > > > is used, which has 4096 pagesize and 256b oob. The ECC strength > > > > was not correct detected by U-Boot > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Heiko Schocher > > > > --- > > > > > > > > drivers/mtd/nand/mxs_nand.c | 3 +++ > > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/mxs_nand.c > > > > b/drivers/mtd/nand/mxs_nand.c > > > > index 2d2b938..00bf036 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/mxs_nand.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/mxs_nand.c > > > > @@ -163,6 +163,9 @@ static inline uint32_t > > > > mxs_nand_get_ecc_strength(uint32_t page_data_size, > > > > > > > > if (page_oob_size == 224) > > > > > > > > return 16; > > > > > > > > + > > > > + if (page_oob_size == 256) > > > > + return 18; > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > return 0; > > > > > > How about calculation the ECC strength dynamically? Peng Fan from > > > Freescale send a patch doing this in December 2014 which was > > > already > > > reviewed by Marek: > > > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/422756/ > > > > > > It is also necessary to change the calculation in mxsboot... > > > > Would be nice if the patch got applied, but I think there were some > > comments and the patch was never fixed/reposted. If Heiko wants to > > do it, that'd be nice. > > Hmm.. I feel, I have not much time left for fixing such things... I can re-submit the patch from Peng Fan together with my fixes for mxsboot. > Joerg: You wrote on Jan. 27, 2015, 11:14 p.m.: > "I was able to fix mxsboot, but I had difficulties with round_down, > which > is a macro definition in linux/kernel.h. I've copied the macro > definition to mxsboot. I will submit the patch in a seperate mail." > > Did you post such a patch? Was this the onyl problem of the patch > from Peng Fan? No, I didn't. I waited for some comment and then I just forgot about it. The main problem with the patch from Peng Fan was that it was not consistent with mxsboot, which still has the hardcoded oobsizes. I copied the calculation to mxsboot.c, but failed to include linux/kernel.h, because mxsboot is compiled with the host compiler and u-boot with the cross-compiler. So I just copied the macro definition for round_down from kernel.h to mxsboot.c. > "I would like to see a comment or a macro for the magic number 13, > which > is the value for the Galois Field, just for clarification" > > I have no idea what 13 means ... This is cited from the i.MX28 Reference Manual: BCH-codes are a type of block-code, which implies that all error- correction is performed over a block of N-symbols. The BCH operation will be performed over GF (2^13 = 8192), which is the Galois Field consisting of 8191 one-bit symbols. > > > Nice domain name btw ;-) > > Indeed. Thanks :-) > > bye, > Heiko