[U-Boot] [PATCH] nand/mxc: set host->page_addr for NAND_CMD_READOOB

[Scott Wood]

On 01/31/2013 02:45:02 PM, Benoît Thébaudeau wrote:
> Hi Scott,
> 
> On Thursday, January 31, 2013 8:47:55 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
> > Without this, all OOB reads are from the last page normally read
> > (or zero at boot).  This results in bad block scans failing to look
> > in the right place, and so no bad blocks are found.

Looking more closely, the calls to send_addr() use page_addr rather  
than host->page_addr, and the oob page read uses "page" in the call to  
cmdfunc, so maybe it's just the debug output that was wrong?

> > Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <scottwood at freescale.com>
> > ---
> > From IRC discussion with a2cypher.  Compile-tested only; testing
> > would be appreciated.
> >
> >  drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand.c |    1 +
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand.c  
> b/drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand.c
> > index d0ded48..32ba340 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand.c
> > @@ -1021,6 +1021,7 @@ void mxc_nand_command(struct mtd_info *mtd,  
> unsigned
> > command,
> >  		break;
> >
> >  	case NAND_CMD_READOOB:
> > +		host->page_addr = page_addr;
> >  		host->col_addr = column;
> >  		host->spare_only = true;
> >  		if (host->pagesize_2k)
> 
> For which NFC version and NAND Flash page size is this?

All, presumably.

> Do you have a means of duplicating the issue?

Not personally; it was found during an IRC discussion with a2cypher.

> I wonder if the appropriate fix would not rather be to replace all  
> occurrences
> of "host->page_addr" with "page", except in mxc_nand_correct_data()  
> and
> mxc_nand_command(). Otherwise, it looks like there will still be  
> weird things
> going on with this variable.

Hmm, what's going on in mxc_nand_read_page_raw_syndrome()?  The caller  
of that calls cmdfunc, then the mxc_nand_read_page_raw_syndrome() calls  
it again, using host->page_addr that was set the first time cmdfunc was  
called? :-P

-Scott