[U-Boot] gpmi-nand driver and jffs2 support

[Huang Shijie <b32955@freescale.com>]

? 2013?09?15? 22:18, Marek Vasut ??:
> Dear Huang Shijie,
>
>> ? 2013?09?04? 23:46, Hector Palacios ??:
>>> Dear Marek,
>>>
>>> On 09/04/2013 04:38 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>> Dear Huang Shijie,
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 04:00:36PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>>>> Dear Huang Shijie,
>>>>>> How come hector was then able to write his JFFS2 partition ?
>>>>> If he uses the gpmi, he should not write the JFFS2, since the gpmi
>>>>> does not support the jffs2. He will get the failure in the end.
>>>> Hector, can you comment on this?
>>> I don't think I'm following these comments. The facts are:
>>> 1) A JFFS2 filesystem image written with nandwrite (mtd-utils v1.5.0)
>>> a) does not mount on kernel v3.10
>>> b) mounts OK on linux-next kernel (v3.12) with the patchset [1] from
>>> Huang
>>> (actually I didn't use linux-next but instead a v3.10 where I merged
>>> all the commits done to MTD in linux-next, which are a lot).
>>>
>>> 2) A JFFS2 filesystem image written with U-Boot v2013.01
>>> a) mounts OK on old FSL kernel 2.6.35
>>> b) does not mount on kernel v3.10 (neither on v3.8, I believe).
>>> c) does not mount on linux-next with the patchset [1]
>> The gpmi driver in FSL kernel 2.6.35 is different from the linux-next or
>> linux v3.10.
>>
>> We have abandoned the old gpmi driver, and we use the same gpmi code in
>> current FSL kernel.
>>
>> Since we swtich to the upstream gpmi code, and it could not support the
>> jffs2,
>>
>> and that's why you mount always failed.
> With the patchset, mounting the jffs should work again, no? If mounting the jffs
If the jffs2 image is written by the uboot, the mounting should not works.


> works with the patchset AND it only works with jffs written using the new
> driver, you will need to introduce soem compatibility option or something along
> that.
do you mean i should a new dt property for the jffs2 support ?
>>> [1]
>>> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2013-August/048360.html
>>>
>>> Marek, could you please confirm 2b on your side, just in case I'm
>>> doing anything wrong in my custom U-Boot?
>>>
>>>>>>> So the jffs2 support is compatiable all the time.
>>>>>> Is the old Freescale 2.6.35 GPMI NAND format compatible with the one
>>>>>> after applying this patchset?
>>>>> Not compatible.
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch set is still underreview.
>>>> So this patch breaks compatiblity with FSL kernel release? This needs
>>>> fixing,
>>>> otherwise it's impossible to do a drop-in replacement for the ancient
>>>> FSL
>>>> kernel.
>>>>
>>>>>>>> that I could mount with Linux 3.7 and earlier?
>>>>>>> I think the mount can be succeeded.
>>>>>> Ok, does that mean that we need this patchset in U-Boot in order to
>>>>>> properly write JFFS2 onto GPMI NAND there? Is that the message you
>>>>>> wanted to relay to us?
>>>>> Besides this patchset, the u-boot needs more patches to sync with the
>>>>> kernel mtd code. Such as the full-id features.
>>>> Can you elaborate on this more? This is very vague, I would like to
>>>> know what
>>>> exactly is missing.
>> 92a2645 mtd: add 4 Toshiba nand chips for the full-id case
>> ec6e87e mtd: add the support to parse out the full-id nand type
> Do these really have any impact?
>
yes. the full-id nand is not supported by the old mtd code.
>> f22d5f6 mtd: add new fields to nand_flash_dev{}
>> 2febcdf mtd: gpmi: set the BCH's geometry with the ecc info
>> d1048aa mtd: add the ecc info for some full-id nand chips
>> 5721934 mtd: parse out the ECC info for the full-id nand chips
>> 2dc0bdd mtd: add ECC info for nand_flash_dev{}
>> e2985fc mtd: replace the hardcode with the onfi_feature()
>> 6dcbe0c mtd: get the ECC info from the Extended Parameter Page
>> 5b40db6 mtd: add a helper to get the supported features for ONFI nand
>> 5138a98 mtd: add data structures for Extended Parameter Page
>> 10c86ba mtd: get the ECC info from the parameter page for ONFI nand
>> 4cfeca2 mtd: add datasheet's ECC information to nand_chip{}
> Hector, can you inspect those patches ?
>
>>> Yes, please, we need more details. This seems to be related with how
>>> the MTD drivers (in Linux and in U-Boot) access the OOB area to store
>>> the JFFS2 cleanmarkers, right?
>>>
>>> The error I'm receiving from the kernel is at fs/jffs2/wbuf.c
>>>
>>> if (!oinfo || oinfo->oobavail == 0) {
>>> pr_err("inconsistent device description\n");
>>> return -EINVAL;
>>> }
>> Before apply the patches above, the gpmi will use all the oob, so
>> "oinfo->oobavail == 0" becomes true.
>>
>> After apply the patches, the gpmi will not use all the oob for the ONFI
>> SLC nand or the full-id nand,
>> and it can supports the jffs2 when you apply the other SLC/MLC patchset.
> So the patches you listed above are not enough?

It should be enough.

thanks
Huang Shijie