[2/3] mtd: rawnand: micron: Disable ECC earlier in the read path

[boris.brezillon@xxxxxxxxxxx (Boris Brezillon)]

On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 22:42:54 +0000
Chris Packham <Chris.Packham at alliedtelesis.co.nz> wrote:

> On 17/07/18 08:55, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> > On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 18:10:57 +0200
> > Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon at bootlin.com> wrote:
> >   
> >> On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 09:00:59 +0000
> >> Chris Packham <Chris.Packham at alliedtelesis.co.nz> wrote:
> >>  
> >>> Hi Boris,
> >>>
> >>> On 04/07/18 00:20, Boris Brezillon wrote:  
> >>>> We are about to support extracting the real number of bitflips for
> >>>> 4-bits ECC when WRITE_RECOMMEND is returned. This requires re-reading
> >>>> the page in raw mode to compare it to the corrected version, and this
> >>>> logic will be placed in micron_nand_on_die_ecc_status_4().
> >>>>
> >>>> Moving the micron_nand_on_die_ecc_setup() will allow us to disable
> >>>> ECC only once.
> >>>>
> >>>> As a result, we have to rework the exit path and add an error path
> >>>> where the ECC is disabled.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon at bootlin.com>  
> >>>
> >>> As I said on the other thread this appears to cause a problem for me on
> >>> the MT29F1G08ABAFAWP-ITE setup I have. I notice we're not able to find
> >>> the BBT, not sure if that is symptom or cause.  
> > 
> > It's most likely the symptom, not the cause.
> >   
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_micron.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_micron.c
> >>>> index 63ac98a36ed7..b9cbaf125a98 100644
> >>>> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_micron.c
> >>>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_micron.c
> >>>> @@ -197,30 +197,37 @@ micron_nand_read_page_on_die_ecc(struct mtd_info *mtd, struct nand_chip *chip,
> >>>>    
> >>>>    	ret = nand_read_page_op(chip, page, 0, NULL, 0);
> >>>>    	if (ret)
> >>>> -		goto out;
> >>>> +		goto err_disable_ecc;
> >>>>    
> >>>>    	ret = nand_status_op(chip, &status);
> >>>>    	if (ret)
> >>>> -		goto out;
> >>>> +		goto err_disable_ecc;
> >>>>    
> >>>>    	ret = nand_exit_status_op(chip);
> >>>>    	if (ret)
> >>>> -		goto out;
> >>>> +		goto err_disable_ecc;
> >>>>    
> >>>> -	if (chip->ecc.strength == 4)
> >>>> -		max_bitflips = micron_nand_on_die_ecc_status_4(chip, status);
> >>>> -	else
> >>>> -		max_bitflips = micron_nand_on_die_ecc_status_8(chip, status);
> >>>> +	micron_nand_on_die_ecc_setup(chip, false);  
> >>
> >> Hm, can you try to move the micron_nand_on_die_ecc_setup(chip, false)
> >> call just before nand_exit_status_op()?
> >>  
> > 
> > Just pushed a branch fixing that [1]. Can you test it? If it works,
> > I'll ask Miquel to drop the initial set of patches and instead pick the
> > fixed ones so that we don't break bisectibility.
> > 
> > [1]https://github.com/bbrezillon/linux-0day/commits/nand/next
> >   
> 
> Still appears to have the same problem.
> 
> I'm guessing that since you can't actually disable ecc on this chip 
> calling micron_nand_on_die_ecc_setup(chip, false); before reading the 
> oob data interferes with it somehow (if I call it after there is no 
> problem).
> 
> We could add code to qualify the attempt to disable ecc early based on 
> it being optional/mandatory or just stick with it being disabled late.

Okay. I gave up on disabling ECC earlier and instead implemented what
you suggested. Can you test
https://github.com/bbrezillon/linux-0day/commits/nand/next again and
let me know if it works for you?

Thanks,

Boris