Hi xiangsheng.hou,
xiangsheng.hou@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on Wed, 13 Oct 2021 17:15:49 +0800:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 2021-10-08 at 18:22 +0200, Miquel Raynal wrote:
> >
> > +static int mxic_ecc_count_biterrs(struct mxic_ecc_engine *eng,
> > struct mtd_info *mtd)
> > +{
> > + struct device *dev = eng->dev;
> > + unsigned int max_bf = 0;
> > + int step;
> > +
> > + for (step = 0; step < eng->steps; step++) {
> > + u8 stat = eng->status[step];
> > +
> > + if (stat == NO_ERR) {
> > + dev_dbg(dev, "ECC step %d: no error\n", step);
> > + } else if (stat == ERASED_CHUNK) {
> > + dev_dbg(dev, "ECC step %d: erased\n", step);
> > + } else if (stat == UNCORR_ERR || stat > MAX_CORR_ERR) {
> > + dev_dbg(dev, "ECC step %d: uncorrectable\n",
> > step);
> > + mtd->ecc_stats.failed++;
> > + } else {
> > + dev_dbg(dev, "ECC step %d: %d bits
> > corrected\n",
> > + step, stat);
> > + max_bf = max_t(unsigned int, max_bf, stat);
> > + mtd->ecc_stats.corrected += stat;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > + return max_bf;
> > +}
>
> In spinand_mtd_read() function, rely on the return value -EBADMSG to
> check whether ecc failed. Therefore, maybe there also need return this
> value in mxic_ecc_count_biterrs() function when uncorrectable ecc
> error?
True, I'll fix this.
Thanks,
Miquèl
