[U-Boot] [PATCH 5/5] NAND: Add scrub.quiet command option

[Marek Vasut]

On Monday, September 12, 2011 08:31:12 PM Scott Wood wrote:
> On 09/12/2011 01:24 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > On Monday, September 12, 2011 08:06:27 PM Scott Wood wrote:
> >> On 09/12/2011 12:45 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>> On Monday, September 12, 2011 06:45:43 PM Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >>>> On Monday, September 12, 2011 00:04:10 Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>>>> This allows the scrub command to scrub without asking the user if he
> >>>>> really wants to scrub the area. Useful in scripts.
> >>>> 
> >>>> "quiet" and "skip user input" are two different things.  can you use a
> >>>> more clean option like accepting "-y" to the "scrub" subcommand ?
> >>> 
> >>> I'd prefer to have this hidden from common users as much as possible.
> >> 
> >> What's the use case for needing to script this, BTW?
> > 
> > Update a block in NAND that's not handled by BCH accelerator in the MX28
> > chip.
> > 
> > The problem is, block 0 has it's own ECC done by bootrom software. That
> > kind of ECC is incompatible with BCH-produced ECC. That's also a reason
> > for needing that write.raw command.
> > 
> > Now, if you try erasing that block, the BCH reads and writes some of it's
> > metadata there. Obviously, since there is different kind of ECC, the
> > metadata aren't there and it chokes, claiming the block is bad and
> > refuses to erase it.
> > 
> > And before you ask why -- that's because the BCH accelerator puts the
> > metadata at random places in the block (every 512 bytes, it puts a few
> > bytes of it's ECC) instead of putting them only to the ECC area. On the
> > other hand, the bootrom ECC puts the whole ECC at offset (1024 + 12)
> > bytes from the start of the block 0.
> 
> Would it make sense to have the driver code treat block 0 specially
> (possibly conditioned on an hwconfig or compile-time config), rather
> than have it be user-driven?

No! What if (very possible situation actually) the user wants to use the whole 
NAND because the user is booting from SD/SPI/... ?

> 
> I'm curious why anything is written on an erase, though, regardless of
> data format.

Badblock markers (some FSL invention) are written always.

> 
> -Scott