Re: [PATCH] mtd: spinand: Add support for GigaDevice GD5F1GQ4UC

[Boris Brezillon <bbrezillon@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 09:00:43 +0100
Stefan Roese <sr@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 24.01.19 08:50, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> > On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 08:35:32 +0100
> > Stefan Roese <sr@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >   
> >> On 23.01.19 13:57, Boris Brezillon wrote:  
> >>> On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 13:40:50 +0100
> >>> Boris Brezillon <bbrezillon@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>      
> >>>>> This definitely does look better. I assume that we are we on the
> >>>>> right track now?  
> >>>>
> >>>> Yep, and it confirms the ECC caps => 8bits/512bytes. Will send a proper
> >>>> commit for the fix I did and Cc you so you can add your
> >>>> Tested-by/Reviewed-by.  
> >>>
> >>> Oh, looks like a side-effect of migrating to the dirmap approach
> >>> (merged in nand/next [1]) is that this bug does not exist. Can you test
> >>> the nand/next branch and let me know if it still works?
> >>>
> >>> [1]http://git.infradead.org/linux-mtd.git/shortlog/refs/heads/nand/next  
> >>
> >> Unfortunately this does not seem to work. I was unable to boot my
> >> platform from this branch directly so I rebased all MTD/NAND related
> >> patches on top of the latest kernel.org tree for this.  
> > 
> > You mean linux-next?  
> 
> No. I can try linux-next as well if necessary.

So which branch/tag is it based on?

>   
> >> Here a log
> >> with this version (new error this time):
> >>
> >> root@mt7688:~# ./nandbiterrs /dev/mtd5 -i
> >> incremental biterrors test
> >> libmtd: error!: cannot write 2048 bytes to mtd5 (eraseblock 0, offset 0)
> >>           error 5 (Input/output error)
> >> Failed to write page 0 in block 0
> >>
> >> Here a log with nandwrite errors:
> >>
> >> root@mt7688:~# flash_erase /dev/mtd5 0 1
> >> Erasing 128 Kibyte @ 0 -- 100 % complete
> >> root@mt7688:~# nandwrite --input-size=2048 /dev/mtd5 /dev/urandom
> >> Writing data to block 0 at offset 0x0
> >> libmtd: error!: cannot write 2048 bytes to mtd5 (eraseblock 0, offset 0)
> >>           error 5 (Input/output error)
> >> Erasing failed write from 00000000 to 0x01ffff  
> > 
> > Weird, I wasn't expecting ERASE to fail (nothing changed in the erase
> > path).
> >   
> >> Writing data to block 1 at offset 0x20000
> >> libmtd: error!: cannot write 2048 bytes to mtd5 (eraseblock 1, offset 0)
> >>           error 5 (Input/output error)
> >> Erasing failed write from 0x020000 to 0x03ffff
> >> Writing data to block 2 at offset 0x40000
> >> libmtd: error!: cannot write 2048 bytes to mtd5 (eraseblock 2, offset 0)
> >>           error 5 (Input/output error)
> >> Erasing failed write from 0x040000 to 0x05ffff
> >> ...
> >>
> >> Any ideas on this?  
> > 
> > Try to revert b47b307ac23d ("mtd: spinand: Use the spi-mem dirmap API").  
> 
> Then I get this error again:
> 
> root@mt7688:~# ./nandbiterrs /dev/mtd5 -i
> incremental biterrors test
> Failed to recover 1 bitflips
> Read error after 0 bit errors per page
> 
> And with your patch from yesterday applied:
> 
> root@mt7688:~# ./nandbiterrs /dev/mtd5 -i
> incremental biterrors test
> Successfully corrected 0 bit errors per subpage
> Inserted biterror @ 1/7
> Read reported 4 corrected bit errors
> Successfully corrected 1 bit errors per subpage
> Inserted biterror @ 3/7
> Read reported 4 corrected bit errors
> Successfully corrected 2 bit errors per subpage
> Inserted biterror @ 5/7
> Read reported 4 corrected bit errors
> Successfully corrected 3 bit errors per subpage
> Inserted biterror @ 7/7
> Read reported 4 corrected bit errors
> Successfully corrected 4 bit errors per subpage
> Inserted biterror @ 8/7
> Read reported 5 corrected bit errors
> Successfully corrected 5 bit errors per subpage
> Inserted biterror @ 10/7
> Read reported 6 corrected bit errors
> Successfully corrected 6 bit errors per subpage
> Inserted biterror @ 12/7
> Read reported 7 corrected bit errors
> Successfully corrected 7 bit errors per subpage
> Inserted biterror @ 14/7
> Read reported 8 corrected bit errors
> Successfully corrected 8 bit errors per subpage
> Inserted biterror @ 17/7
> Failed to recover 1 bitflips
> Read error after 9 bit errors per page

Okay, that means we have a problem with the dirmap patch :-/.

______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/