On 04.07.2023 12:56, Miquel Raynal wrote: > Hi Arseniy, > > avkrasnov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on Tue, 4 Jul 2023 12:46:51 +0300: > >> On 04.07.2023 12:41, Miquel Raynal wrote: >>> Hi Arseniy, >>> >>> avkrasnov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on Tue, 4 Jul 2023 12:23:03 +0300: >>> >>>> On 04.07.2023 11:36, Miquel Raynal wrote: >>>>> Hi Arseniy, >>>>> >>>>> AVKrasnov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on Wed, 28 Jun 2023 12:29:36 +0300: >>>>> >>>>>> Meson NAND supports both 512B and 1024B ECC step size. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Arseniy Krasnov <AVKrasnov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> drivers/mtd/nand/raw/meson_nand.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------- >>>>>> 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/meson_nand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/meson_nand.c >>>>>> index 345212e8c691..6cc4f63b86c8 100644 >>>>>> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/meson_nand.c >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/meson_nand.c >>>>>> @@ -135,6 +135,7 @@ struct meson_nfc_nand_chip { >>>>>> struct meson_nand_ecc { >>>>>> u32 bch; >>>>>> u32 strength; >>>>>> + u32 size; >>>>>> }; >>>>>> >>>>>> struct meson_nfc_data { >>>>>> @@ -190,7 +191,8 @@ struct meson_nfc { >>>>>> }; >>>>>> >>>>>> enum { >>>>>> - NFC_ECC_BCH8_1K = 2, >>>>>> + NFC_ECC_BCH8_512 = 1, >>>>>> + NFC_ECC_BCH8_1K, >>>>>> NFC_ECC_BCH24_1K, >>>>>> NFC_ECC_BCH30_1K, >>>>>> NFC_ECC_BCH40_1K, >>>>>> @@ -198,15 +200,16 @@ enum { >>>>>> NFC_ECC_BCH60_1K, >>>>>> }; >>>>>> >>>>>> -#define MESON_ECC_DATA(b, s) { .bch = (b), .strength = (s)} >>>>>> +#define MESON_ECC_DATA(b, s, sz) { .bch = (b), .strength = (s), .size = (sz) } >>>>>> >>>>>> static struct meson_nand_ecc meson_ecc[] = { >>>>>> - MESON_ECC_DATA(NFC_ECC_BCH8_1K, 8), >>>>>> - MESON_ECC_DATA(NFC_ECC_BCH24_1K, 24), >>>>>> - MESON_ECC_DATA(NFC_ECC_BCH30_1K, 30), >>>>>> - MESON_ECC_DATA(NFC_ECC_BCH40_1K, 40), >>>>>> - MESON_ECC_DATA(NFC_ECC_BCH50_1K, 50), >>>>>> - MESON_ECC_DATA(NFC_ECC_BCH60_1K, 60), >>>>>> + MESON_ECC_DATA(NFC_ECC_BCH8_512, 8, 512), >>>>>> + MESON_ECC_DATA(NFC_ECC_BCH8_1K, 8, 1024), >>>>>> + MESON_ECC_DATA(NFC_ECC_BCH24_1K, 24, 1024), >>>>>> + MESON_ECC_DATA(NFC_ECC_BCH30_1K, 30, 1024), >>>>>> + MESON_ECC_DATA(NFC_ECC_BCH40_1K, 40, 1024), >>>>>> + MESON_ECC_DATA(NFC_ECC_BCH50_1K, 50, 1024), >>>>>> + MESON_ECC_DATA(NFC_ECC_BCH60_1K, 60, 1024), >>>>>> }; >>>>>> >>>>>> static int meson_nand_calc_ecc_bytes(int step_size, int strength) >>>>>> @@ -224,8 +227,27 @@ static int meson_nand_calc_ecc_bytes(int step_size, int strength) >>>>>> >>>>>> NAND_ECC_CAPS_SINGLE(meson_gxl_ecc_caps, >>>>>> meson_nand_calc_ecc_bytes, 1024, 8, 24, 30, 40, 50, 60); >>>>>> -NAND_ECC_CAPS_SINGLE(meson_axg_ecc_caps, >>>>>> - meson_nand_calc_ecc_bytes, 1024, 8); >>>>>> + >>>>>> +static const int axg_stepinfo_strengths[] = { 8 }; >>>>>> +static const struct nand_ecc_step_info axg_stepinfo_1024 = { >>>>>> + .stepsize = 1024, >>>>>> + .strengths = axg_stepinfo_strengths, >>>>>> + .nstrengths = ARRAY_SIZE(axg_stepinfo_strengths) >>>>>> +}; >>>>>> + >>>>>> +static const struct nand_ecc_step_info axg_stepinfo_512 = { >>>>>> + .stepsize = 512, >>>>>> + .strengths = axg_stepinfo_strengths, >>>>>> + .nstrengths = ARRAY_SIZE(axg_stepinfo_strengths) >>>>>> +}; >>>>>> + >>>>>> +static const struct nand_ecc_step_info axg_stepinfo[] = { axg_stepinfo_1024, axg_stepinfo_512 }; >>>>>> + >>>>>> +static const struct nand_ecc_caps meson_axg_ecc_caps = { >>>>>> + .stepinfos = axg_stepinfo, >>>>>> + .nstepinfos = ARRAY_SIZE(axg_stepinfo), >>>>>> + .calc_ecc_bytes = meson_nand_calc_ecc_bytes, >>>>>> +}; >>>>>> >>>>>> static struct meson_nfc_nand_chip *to_meson_nand(struct nand_chip *nand) >>>>>> { >>>>>> @@ -1259,7 +1281,8 @@ static int meson_nand_bch_mode(struct nand_chip *nand) >>>>>> return -EINVAL; >>>>>> >>>>>> for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(meson_ecc); i++) { >>>>>> - if (meson_ecc[i].strength == nand->ecc.strength) { >>>>>> + if (meson_ecc[i].strength == nand->ecc.strength && >>>>>> + meson_ecc[i].size == nand->ecc.size) { >>>>>> meson_chip->bch_mode = meson_ecc[i].bch; >>>>>> return 0; >>>>>> } >>>>>> @@ -1278,7 +1301,7 @@ static int meson_nand_attach_chip(struct nand_chip *nand) >>>>>> struct meson_nfc *nfc = nand_get_controller_data(nand); >>>>>> struct meson_nfc_nand_chip *meson_chip = to_meson_nand(nand); >>>>>> struct mtd_info *mtd = nand_to_mtd(nand); >>>>>> - int nsectors = mtd->writesize / 1024; >>>>>> + int nsectors = mtd->writesize / 512; >>>>> >>>>> This cannot be unconditional, right? >>>> >>>> Hello Miquel! >>>> >>>> Yes, this code looks strange. 'nsectors' is used to calculate space in OOB >>>> that could be used by ECC engine (this value will be passed as 'oobavail' >>>> to 'nand_ecc_choose_conf()'). Idea of 512 is to consider "worst" case >>>> for ECC, e.g. minimal number of bytes for ECC engine (and at the same time >>>> maximum number of free bytes). For Meson, if ECC step size is 512, then we >>>> have 4 x 2 free bytes in OOB (if step size if 1024 then we have 2 x 2 free >>>> bytes in OOB). >>>> >>>> I think this code could be reworked in the following way: >>>> >>>> if ECC step size is already known here (from DTS), calculate 'nsectors' using >>>> given value (div by 512 for example). Otherwise calculate 'nsectors' in the >>>> current manner: >>> >>> It will always be known when these function are run. There is no >>> guessing here. >> >> Hm I checked, that but if step size is not set in DTS, here it will be 0, >> then it will be selected in 'nand_ecc_choose_conf()' according provided 'ecc_caps' >> and 'oobavail'... >> >> Anyway, I'll do the following thing: >> >> int nsectors; >> >> if (nand->ecc.size) >> nsectors = mtd->writesize / nand->ecc.size; <--- this is for 512 ECC > > You should set nand->ecc.size in ->attach_chip() instead. Sorry, didn't get it... if ECC step size is set in DTS, then here, in chip attach callback it will be already known (DT part was processed in 'rawnand_dt_init()'). If ECC step size is unknown (e.g. 0 here), 'nand_ecc_choose_conf()' will set it according provided ecc caps. What do You mean for "You should set ..." ? Thanks, Arseniy > >> else >> nsectors = mtd->writesize / 1024; <--- this is for default 1024 ECC >> >> Thanks, Arseniy >> >>> >>>> >>>> int nsectors = mtd->writesize / 1024; >>>> >>>> Moreover 1024 is default ECC step size for this driver, so default behaviour >>>> will be preserved. >>> >>> Yes, otherwise you would break existing users. >>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, Arseniy >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> int raw_writesize; >>>>>> int ret; >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Miquèl >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Miquèl > > > Thanks, > Miquèl