From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marek Vasut Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 18:53:16 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 07/10] mtd: nand: s3c: Add missing correction and select_chip functions In-Reply-To: <1455319131.2463.32.camel@buserror.net> References: <1413045778-5690-1-git-send-email-marex@denx.de> <1413045778-5690-7-git-send-email-marex@denx.de> <1414536308.23458.116.camel@snotra.buserror.net> <201601140241.39961.marex@denx.de> <1455319131.2463.32.camel@buserror.net> Message-ID: <56C7568C.6090607@denx.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 02/13/2016 12:18 AM, Scott Wood wrote: > On Thu, 2016-01-14 at 02:41 +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: >> On Tuesday, October 28, 2014 at 11:45:08 PM, Scott Wood wrote: >>> On Sat, 2014-10-11 at 18:42 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: >>>> + /* sometimes people do not think about using the ECC, so check >>>> + * to see if we have an 0xff,0xff,0xff read ECC and then ignore >>>> + * the error, on the assumption that this is an un-eccd page. >>>> + */ >>> >>> Eww. I suppose I won't argue too loudly if Linux is doing the same >>> thing, but what if it's a corrupted blank page, or the ECC just happened >>> to turn out as all 0xff? It seems like there should at least be a >>> warning the first time this happens, and ideally it should be >>> configurable. >>> >>>> + if (read_ecc[0] == 0xff && read_ecc[1] == 0xff && read_ecc[2] >>>> == 0xff >>>> + /*&& info->platform->ignore_unset_ecc*/) >>>> >>>> return 0; >>> >>> So it looks like it is configurable in Linux, but you've commented it >>> out here. >>> >>>> @@ -221,6 +298,8 @@ int board_nand_init(struct nand_chip *nand) >>>> >>>> nand->dev_ready = s3c24x0_dev_ready; >>>> >>>> + nand->chip_delay = 50; >>> >>> I'm not sure how this is related to the changes described in the >>> changelog... >> >> Can you collect the MTD patches which are applicable at least and drop this >> one? > > 4/10 is already merged. Which patches are you referring to that don't have > comments, still apply cleanly, and are patching a NAND file? Most of this patchset.