From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrei Yakimov Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 20:54:07 -0700 Subject: [U-Boot] Fix fsl_elbc_nand driver In-Reply-To: <1432177865.27761.201.camel@freescale.com> References: <1432001789.14341.120.camel@andreilinux> <1432071614.27761.77.camel@freescale.com> <1432074568.14341.149.camel@andreilinux> <1432075134.27761.82.camel@freescale.com> <1432078969.14341.178.camel@andreilinux> <1432160719.27761.108.camel@freescale.com> <1432171628.14341.246.camel@andreilinux> <1432172233.27761.147.camel@freescale.com> <1432173354.14341.258.camel@andreilinux> <1432175221.27761.176.camel@freescale.com> <1432176178.14341.267.camel@andreilinux> <1432176380.27761.182.camel@freescale.com> <1432177427.14341.279.camel@andreilinux> <1432177865.27761.201.camel@freescale.com> Message-ID: <1432180447.14341.299.camel@andreilinux> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Wed, 2015-05-20 at 22:11 -0500, Scott Wood wrote: > On Wed, 2015-05-20 at 20:03 -0700, Andrei Yakimov wrote: > > On Wed, 2015-05-20 at 21:46 -0500, Scott Wood wrote: > > > On Wed, 2015-05-20 at 19:42 -0700, Andrei Yakimov wrote: > > > > For now lets stick with 1536 in u-boot. > > > > I will send a patch. > > > > At least it will not loosing flash over time > > > > as nand ages. > > > > > > > > I understand what you wish, and will take a look > > > > on it inside fresh new kernel. I found one more driver - > > > > marvel looks like have same problem. > > > > I will check how NAND_CMD_RNDOUT is working. > > > > Perhaps we do not need extra read_param(), > > > > and use only NAND_CMD_RNDOUT to get next > > > > block inside page loop. > > > > > > Again, I'm a reluctant to use RNDOUT in the default read_param() because > > > that would change the flow for all controllers and chips, and while the > > > chip manual I'm looking at says it's OK, it introduces risk that it > > > doesn't work everywhere (e.g. some controller drivers that provide their > > > own cmdfunc don't implement RNDOUT). > > RNDOUT is already used by nand_flash_detect_ext_param_page(), so this > isn't as much of a concern for ONFI, but it could be an issue with > nand_flash_detect_jedec(). > > > Forget about read_param(), > > Then how will it work on controllers like eLBC/IFC which is the whole > point? > > > just like this: I miss this line: chip->cmdfunc(mtd, NAND_CMD_PARAM, 0, -1); > > for (i = 0; i < 3; i++) { > > for (j = 0; j < sizeof(*p); j++) > > ((uint8_t *)p)[j] = chip->read_byte(mtd); > > if (onfi_crc16(ONFI_CRC_BASE, (uint8_t *)p, 254) == > > le16_to_cpu(p->crc)) { > > break; > > } > > chip->cmdfunc(mtd, NAND_CMD_RNDOUT, , -1); > > } > > > > > > and this is good - will be "no op" or "bad command" error, > > which could be ignored - so for this drivers operation flow is > > unchanged. > > RNDOUT needs to come before read_buf() and it needs to specify the > offset you want. > column address - it is exactly offset for RNDOUT. First param read 256/512 bytes, if it fail, we do RNDOUT to get next. we will not do extra RNDOUT - it is for() loop. I can test it on my board. This is really good solution if it work. it is just 1 line, and only when ONFI mark already read from flash. And we can leave (NAND_CMD_PARAM, 0x40) (JDEC label) handling for kernel folks. My problem only jesd230B do not specify PARAM command, ONFI4.0 - do not expect column address for PARAM. Linux kernel cleary doing (NAND_CMD_PARAM, 0x40). This is bit annoying. Question is elbc/ifc old controllers - is it worth the effort? > -Scott > >