From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755279AbaI3IE0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Sep 2014 04:04:26 -0400 Received: from top.free-electrons.com ([176.31.233.9]:53007 "EHLO mail.free-electrons.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751809AbaI3IET convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Sep 2014 04:04:19 -0400 Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 10:04:15 +0200 From: Boris Brezillon To: Iwo Mergler Cc: Huang Shijie , Mike Voytovich , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Huang Shijie , "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" , Roy Lee , Brian Norris , David Woodhouse , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: nand: gpmi: add proper raw access support Message-ID: <20140930100415.4834971d@bbrezillon> In-Reply-To: References: <1410339339-25561-1-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> <20140911120928.GA1585@localhost.localdomain> <20140911143616.3ebb025a@bbrezillon> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.3 (GTK+ 2.24.23; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Iwo, On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 11:22:11 +1000 Iwo Mergler wrote: > On Thu, 11 Sep 2014 22:36:16 +1000 > Boris BREZILLON wrote: > > > > Well, I don't know about freescale specific tools, but at least I have > > an example with mtd_nandbiterrs module. > > This module is assuming it can write only the data part of a NAND page > > without modifying the OOB area (see [1]), which in GPMI controller > > case is impossible because raw write function store the data as if > > there were no specific scheme, while there is one: > > (metadata + n x (data_chunk + ECC bytes) + remaining_bytes). > > > > Hi Boris, > > > just as an aside, only the incremental bit errors test in nandbiterrs > positively requires raw data write. > > The overwrite test (re-write the same page data repeatedly without > erase), only uses raw access because I was lazy. A normal ECC write > would do just as well. Okay. Anyway, the test I'm really interested in is the incremental bit errors test :-). BTW, any reason you chose to implement this test/testsuite as a module ? >>From my understanding (and tell me if I'm wrong) we could do the same from user-space. Best Regards, Boris -- Boris Brezillon, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 10:04:15 +0200 From: Boris Brezillon To: Iwo Mergler Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: nand: gpmi: add proper raw access support Message-ID: <20140930100415.4834971d@bbrezillon> In-Reply-To: References: <1410339339-25561-1-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> <20140911120928.GA1585@localhost.localdomain> <20140911143616.3ebb025a@bbrezillon> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Mike Voytovich , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Huang Shijie , "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" , Roy Lee , Brian Norris , Huang Shijie , David Woodhouse , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi Iwo, On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 11:22:11 +1000 Iwo Mergler wrote: > On Thu, 11 Sep 2014 22:36:16 +1000 > Boris BREZILLON wrote: > >=20 > > Well, I don't know about freescale specific tools, but at least I have > > an example with mtd_nandbiterrs module. > > This module is assuming it can write only the data part of a NAND page > > without modifying the OOB area (see [1]), which in GPMI controller > > case is impossible because raw write function store the data as if > > there were no specific scheme, while there is one: > > (metadata + n x (data_chunk + ECC bytes) + remaining_bytes). > >=20 >=20 > Hi Boris, >=20 >=20 > just as an aside, only the incremental bit errors test in nandbiterrs > positively requires raw data write. >=20 > The overwrite test (re-write the same page data repeatedly without > erase), only uses raw access because I was lazy. A normal ECC write > would do just as well. Okay. Anyway, the test I'm really interested in is the incremental bit errors test :-). BTW, any reason you chose to implement this test/testsuite as a module ? =46rom my understanding (and tell me if I'm wrong) we could do the same from user-space. Best Regards, Boris --=20 Boris Brezillon, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com (Boris Brezillon) Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 10:04:15 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] mtd: nand: gpmi: add proper raw access support In-Reply-To: References: <1410339339-25561-1-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> <20140911120928.GA1585@localhost.localdomain> <20140911143616.3ebb025a@bbrezillon> Message-ID: <20140930100415.4834971d@bbrezillon> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Iwo, On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 11:22:11 +1000 Iwo Mergler wrote: > On Thu, 11 Sep 2014 22:36:16 +1000 > Boris BREZILLON wrote: > > > > Well, I don't know about freescale specific tools, but at least I have > > an example with mtd_nandbiterrs module. > > This module is assuming it can write only the data part of a NAND page > > without modifying the OOB area (see [1]), which in GPMI controller > > case is impossible because raw write function store the data as if > > there were no specific scheme, while there is one: > > (metadata + n x (data_chunk + ECC bytes) + remaining_bytes). > > > > Hi Boris, > > > just as an aside, only the incremental bit errors test in nandbiterrs > positively requires raw data write. > > The overwrite test (re-write the same page data repeatedly without > erase), only uses raw access because I was lazy. A normal ECC write > would do just as well. Okay. Anyway, the test I'm really interested in is the incremental bit errors test :-). BTW, any reason you chose to implement this test/testsuite as a module ? >>From my understanding (and tell me if I'm wrong) we could do the same from user-space. Best Regards, Boris -- Boris Brezillon, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com