Re: [PATCH] nand: raw: use write_oob_raw for MTD_OPS_AUTO_OOB mode

From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>
To: "Álvaro Fernández Rojas" <noltari@gmail.com>
Cc: miquel.raynal@bootlin.com, richard@nod.at, vigneshr@ti.com,
	s.hauer@pengutronix.de, masonccyang@mxic.com.tw,
	christophe.kerello@st.com, stefan@agner.ch, piotrs@cadence.com,
	devik@eaxlabs.cz, tglx@linutronix.de,
	linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nand: raw: use write_oob_raw for MTD_OPS_AUTO_OOB mode
Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 12:32:37 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200504123237.5c128668@collabora.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200504094253.2741109-1-noltari@gmail.com>

On Mon,  4 May 2020 11:42:53 +0200
Álvaro Fernández Rojas <noltari@gmail.com> wrote:

> Some NAND controllers change the ECC bytes when OOB is written with ECC
> enabled.
> This is a problem in brcmnand, since adding JFFS2 cleanmarkers after the page
> has been erased will change the ECC bytes to 0 and the controller will think
> the block is bad.
> It can be fixed by using write_oob_raw, which ensures ECC is disabled.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Álvaro Fernández Rojas <noltari@gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c
> index c24e5e2ba130..755d25200520 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c
> @@ -488,7 +488,7 @@ static int nand_do_write_oob(struct nand_chip *chip, loff_t to,
>  
>  	nand_fill_oob(chip, ops->oobbuf, ops->ooblen, ops);
>  
> -	if (ops->mode == MTD_OPS_RAW)
> +	if (ops->mode == MTD_OPS_AUTO_OOB || ops->mode == MTD_OPS_RAW)
>  		status = chip->ecc.write_oob_raw(chip, page & chip->pagemask);

The doc says:

@MTD_OPS_PLACE_OOB:  OOB data are placed at the given offset (default)
@MTD_OPS_AUTO_OOB:   OOB data are automatically placed at the free areas
                     which are defined by the internal ecclayout
@MTD_OPS_RAW:        data are transferred as-is, with no error
		     correction; this mode implies %MTD_OPS_PLACE_OOB

To me, that means MTD_OPS_PLACE_OOB and MTD_OPS_AUTO_OOB do not imply
MTD_OPS_RAW. Anyway those modes are just too vague. We really should
separate the ECC-disabled/ECC-enabled concept (AKA raw vs non-raw mode)
from the OOB placement scheme. IIRC, Miquel had a patchset doing that.

We also should have the concept of protected OOB-region vs
unprotected-OOB-region if we want JFFS2 to work with controllers that
protect part of the OOB region. Once we have that we can patch JFFS2
to write things with "ECC-disabled"+"auto-OOB-placement-on-unprotected
area".

>  	else
>  		status = chip->ecc.write_oob(chip, page & chip->pagemask);