On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 19:23:46 +0800 Liang Yang <liang.yang@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> + mtd->ecc_stats.failed++; > >> + continue; > >> + } > >> + mtd->ecc_stats.corrected += ECC_ERR_CNT(*info); > >> + bitflips = max_t(u32, bitflips, ECC_ERR_CNT(*info)); > >> + } > > > > Are you sure you handle correctly empty pages with bf? > > > if scramble is enable, i would say yes here. > when scramble is disabled, i am considering how to use the helper > nand_check_erased_ecc_chunk, but it seems that i can't get the ecc > bytes which is caculated by ecc engine.by the way, nfc dma doesn't send > out the ecc parity bytes. Even if the ECC engine is disabled? > so i would suggest using scramble. > No, please don't force people to use the scrambler. > >> + > >> +const void * > >> +meson_nand_op_get_dma_safe_output_buf(const struct nand_op_instr *instr) > >> +{ > >> + if (WARN_ON(instr->type != NAND_OP_DATA_OUT_INSTR)) > >> + return NULL; > >> + > >> + if (virt_addr_valid(instr->ctx.data.buf.out) && > >> + !object_is_on_stack(instr->ctx.data.buf.out)) > > > > Can you please create helpers for that? I guess it will help removing > > these checks once the core will have a DMA-safe approach. > > > I will use below definition: > #define BUFFER_IS_DMA_SAFE(x) \ > (virt_addr_valid((x)) && (!object_is_on_stack((x)))) > > Is it ok? Please define a function, not a macro. ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/