[U-Boot] [PATCH v2] pcm058: fix NAND flash not using badblock table

[Marek Vasut]

On 12/07/2018 01:15 PM, Harald Seiler wrote:
> Hello Marek,

Hi,

> On Fri, 2018-12-07 at 12:48 +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 12/07/2018 10:19 AM, Harald Seiler wrote:
>>> Currently, U-Boot ignores the BBT stored in the last 4 blocks of NAND
>>> flash because the NAND_BBT_USE_FLASH flag is not set.  This leads to
>>> two issues:
>>>
>>> * U-Boot silently uses a memory-only BBT which is initialized with all
>>>   blocks marked as good.  This means, actual bad blocks are marked good
>>>   and U-Boot might try writing to or reading from them.
>>> * The BBT in flash, which will be created once Linux boots up, is not
>>>   off limits for a driver ontop, like UBI.  While it does not seem to
>>>   consistently produce an error, sometimes UBI will fail to attach
>>>   because the BBT blocks obviously don't contain valid UBI data.
>>>
>>> To fix this, this patch sets the CONFIG_SYS_NAND_USE_FLASH_BBT option,
>>> which is used in ./drivers/mtd/nand/raw/mxs_nand.c to decide whether
>>> a BBT in flash is used.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Harald Seiler <hws at denx.de>
>>
>> V2 Changelog is missing.
>>
>>> ---
>>>  include/configs/pcm058.h | 1 +
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/configs/pcm058.h b/include/configs/pcm058.h
>>> index 49048c163f..b9bc08b388 100644
>>> --- a/include/configs/pcm058.h
>>> +++ b/include/configs/pcm058.h
>>> @@ -55,6 +55,7 @@
>>>  #define CONFIG_SYS_NAND_BASE		0x40000000
>>>  #define CONFIG_SYS_NAND_5_ADDR_CYCLE
>>>  #define CONFIG_SYS_NAND_ONFI_DETECTION
>>> +#define CONFIG_SYS_NAND_USE_FLASH_BBT
>>
>> Shouldn't this be enabled on all boards with GPMI NAND ?
>>
> 
> I looked at other boards and they all defined this config, so I
> assumed this was the way to go ... But yes, as far as I understand,
> it would make sense to have it enabled most of the time.  Although
> there is some code which makes this configuration from the
> devicetree, which might be an even better solution.

Cool, if this can be fixed in a more general manner, that'd be awesome
and would help others too. Better yet, it'd get rid of possibly
hazardous duplication. Can you research it ?

-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut