[U-Boot] [PATCH] mtd: atmel_nand: according to pmecc version to perform 0xff page correction
Josh Wu
josh.wu at atmel.com
Fri Jan 16 09:51:43 CET 2015
Hi, Andreas
On 1/16/2015 4:24 PM, Andreas Bießmann wrote:
> Hi Bo, Josh,
>
> On 01/16/2015 07:50 AM, Josh Wu wrote:
>> Hi, Bo
>>
>> On 1/16/2015 1:27 PM, Bo Shen wrote:
>>> Hi Josh,
>>>
>>> On 01/16/2015 11:54 AM, Josh Wu wrote:
>>>> As the PMECC hardware has different version. In SAMA5D4 chip, the
>>>> PMECC ip
>>>> can generate 0xff pmecc ECC value for all 0xff sector.
>>>>
>>>> According to this, add PMECC version check, if it's SAMA5D4 then we
>>>> always
>>>> let PMECC hardware to correct it.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Josh Wu <josh.wu at atmel.com>
>>> except the nitpick.
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Bo Shen <voice.shen at atmel.com>
> Acked-by: Andreas Bießmann <andreas.devel at googlemail.com>
Thanks.
>
>> Thanks for the quick review.
>>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> drivers/mtd/nand/atmel_nand.c | 9 +++++++++
>>>> drivers/mtd/nand/atmel_nand_ecc.h | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> 2 files changed, 29 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/atmel_nand.c
>>>> b/drivers/mtd/nand/atmel_nand.c
>>>> index 620b6e8..b16e3aa 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/atmel_nand.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/atmel_nand.c
>>>> @@ -44,6 +44,7 @@ struct atmel_nand_host {
>>>> u8 pmecc_corr_cap;
>>>> u16 pmecc_sector_size;
>>>> u32 pmecc_index_table_offset;
>>>> + u32 pmecc_version;
>>>>
>>>> int pmecc_bytes_per_sector;
>>>> int pmecc_sector_number;
>>>> @@ -486,6 +487,10 @@ static int pmecc_correction(struct mtd_info
>>>> *mtd, u32 pmecc_stat, uint8_t *buf,
>>>> int i, err_nbr, eccbytes;
>>>> uint8_t *buf_pos;
>>>>
>>>> + /* SAMA5D4 PMECC IP can correct errors for all 0xff page */
>>>> + if (host->pmecc_version >= PMECC_VERSION_SAMA5D4)
>>> I think we can hard coded here, then we can drop the definition in
>>> header file.
>> I don't like hard coded magic number in personly.
> me too!
>
>>>> + goto normal_check;
>>>> +
>>>> eccbytes = nand_chip->ecc.bytes;
>>>> for (i = 0; i < eccbytes; i++)
>>>> if (ecc[i] != 0xff)
>>>> @@ -961,6 +966,10 @@ static int atmel_pmecc_nand_init_params(struct
>>>> nand_chip *nand,
>>>> nand->ecc.write_page = atmel_nand_pmecc_write_page;
>>>> nand->ecc.strength = cap;
>>>>
>>>> + /* Check the PMECC ip version */
>>>> + host->pmecc_version = pmecc_readl(host->pmerrloc, version);
>>>> + dev_dbg(host->dev, "PMECC IP version is: %x\n",
>>>> host->pmecc_version);
>>>> +
>>>> atmel_pmecc_core_init(mtd);
>>>>
>>>> return 0;
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/atmel_nand_ecc.h
>>>> b/drivers/mtd/nand/atmel_nand_ecc.h
>>>> index eac860d..b2d2682 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/atmel_nand_ecc.h
>>>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/atmel_nand_ecc.h
>>>> @@ -123,6 +123,20 @@ struct pmecc_errloc_regs {
>>>> u32 sigma[25]; /* 0x28-0x88 Error Location Sigma Registers */
>>>> u32 el[24]; /* 0x8C-0xE8 Error Location Registers */
>>>> u32 reserved1[5]; /* 0xEC-0xFC Reserved */
>>>> +
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * 0x100-0x1F8:
>>>> + * Reserved for AT91SAM9X5, AT91SAM9N12.
>>>> + * HSMC registers for SAMA5D3, SAMA5D4.
>>>> + */
>>> I think no need to add this.
>> actually, I would like to keep those comments.
>> As in the datasheet, sama5d3 and sama5d4's PMECC ERRLOC only have the
>> register range: 0x0~0xFF.
>> and the range 0x100-0x1F8 is for the HSMC.
>>
>> So people will be confused if they find HSMC definitions in the
>> PMECC_ERRLOC structure.
>> I think list this comment would be cleaner.
> This is reasonable, please let the comment in.
>
>>>> + u32 reserved2[63];
>>>> +
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * 0x1FC:
>>>> + * PMECC version for AT91SAM9X5, AT91SAM9N12.
>>>> + * HSMC version for SAMA5D3, SAMA5D4. Can refer as PMECC version.
>>>> + */
>>> ditto.
>> Like mentioned above, I want avoid the confusion about PMECC_ERRLOC/HSMC.
>>
>>>> + u32 version;
>>>> };
>>>>
>>>> /* For Error Location Configuration Register */
>>>> @@ -137,6 +151,12 @@ struct pmecc_errloc_regs {
>>>> #define PMERRLOC_ERR_NUM_MASK (0x1f << 8)
>>>> #define PMERRLOC_CALC_DONE (1 << 0)
>>>>
>>>> +/* PMECC IP version */
>>>> +#define PMECC_VERSION_SAMA5D4 0x113
>>>> +#define PMECC_VERSION_SAMA5D3 0x112
>>>> +#define PMECC_VERSION_AT91SAM9N12 0x102
>>> No where will use the upper three definitions, we can drop them.
>> I don't have strong option about this. Just think the version
>> information is useful for other to reference.
> Can someone else get this information from the datasheets?
No, This information are not in datasheet.
> If not please
> let this information there.
Okay. let's keep this as it is.
Best Regards,
Josh Wu
>
> Best regards
>
> Andreas Bießmann
More information about the U-Boot
mailing list