[U-Boot] [PATCH] mxs_nand: Fix ECC strength for NAND flash with OOB size of 256

[U-Boot] [PATCH] mxs_nand: Fix ECC strength for NAND flash with OOB size of 256

[Heiko Schocher]

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 <hs@denx.de>
---

 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;
-- 
2.1.0

[U-Boot] [PATCH] mxs_nand: Fix ECC strength for NAND flash with OOB size of 256

[Jörg Krause]

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 <hs@denx.de>
> ---
> 
>  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...

Best regards
J?rg Krause

[U-Boot] [PATCH] mxs_nand: Fix ECC strength for NAND flash with OOB size of 256

[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 <hs@denx.de>
> > ---
> > 
> >  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.

Nice domain name btw ;-)

Best regards,
Marek Vasut

[U-Boot] [PATCH] mxs_nand: Fix ECC strength for NAND flash with OOB size of 256

[Heiko Schocher]

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 <hs@denx.de>
>>> ---
>>>
>>>   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...

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?

"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 ...

> Nice domain name btw ;-)

Indeed.

bye,
Heiko
-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,      Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany

[U-Boot] [PATCH] mxs_nand: Fix ECC strength for NAND flash with OOB size of 256

[Marek Vasut]

On Monday, April 13, 2015 at 11:01:14 AM, 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 <hs@denx.de>
> >>> ---
> >>> 
> >>>   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...
> 
> 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?
> 
> "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 ...

Well I know what GF(13) stands for, but why this particular prime (13) is
chosen in the computation, that is not clear. So a comment would really be
helpful here.

Best regards,

[U-Boot] [PATCH] mxs_nand: Fix ECC strength for NAND flash with OOB size of 256

[Jörg Krause]

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 <hs@denx.de>
> > > > ---
> > > > 
> > > >   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

[U-Boot] [PATCH] mxs_nand: Fix ECC strength for NAND flash with OOB size of 256

[Heiko Schocher]

Hello Joerg,

Am 13.04.2015 13:38, schrieb J?rg Krause:
> 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 <hs@denx.de>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>>    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.

Yes, please (and with a comment for the magic number 13 ;-)

I can test your patches then on an imx6 based board ... maybe we
do not need my patch then!

>> 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.

Thanks!

bye,
Heiko
-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,      Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany