From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Scott Wood Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:09:44 -0600 Subject: [U-Boot] Nand dump and nand bad block disagree In-Reply-To: <201202291406.29073.vapier@gentoo.org> References: <4F4D65FF.4070700@freescale.com> <201202291406.29073.vapier@gentoo.org> Message-ID: <4F4E77F8.2030908@freescale.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 02/29/2012 01:06 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Wednesday 29 February 2012 04:02:39 jean-philippe francois wrote: >> Le 29 f?vrier 2012 00:40, Scott Wood a ?crit : >>> Is this a 16-bit NAND? If so, the first two bytes have to be 0xffff, >>> unless the controller driver defines the bad block pattern differently. >> >> It is an 8 bit nand. The badblock patern can be redefined by the controller >> driver to be different from the one in nand_base.c ? Do you have an example >> of this ? > > look at the Blackfin nand driver (in u-boot and linux). we have to override > the badblock layout because our on-chip boot rom expects something other than > what linux uses. But be careful when doing this -- it really should match what manufacturers will write. If it's an 8-bit NAND, I don't see why it would be looking for anything but the first byte by default. Overriding should not be necessary. -Scott