On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 1:34 PM Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Kamal, > > Kamal Dasu <kdasu.kdev@xxxxxxxxx> wrote on Mon, 20 May 2019 13:31:52 > -0400: > > > Will make the changes and send a V2 patch. > > > > On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 8:44 AM Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Kamal, > > > > > > Kamal Dasu <kdasu.kdev@xxxxxxxxx> wrote on Fri, 17 May 2019 14:29:55 > > > -0400: > > > > > > > This change supports nand-ecc-step-size and nand-ecc-strenght fields in > > > > > > strength > > > > > > > brcmnand dt node to be optional. > > > > > > DT ^ extra space > > > > > > > see: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/brcm,brcmnand.txt > > > > > > > > If both nand-ecc-strength and nand-ecc-step-size are not specified in > > > > device tree node for NAND, nand_base driver does detect onfi ext ecc > > > > > > s/nand_base driver/the raw NAND layer/ > > > s/onfi/ONFI/ > > > s/ecc/ECC/ > > > > > > What is "ext"? Please use plain English here. > > > > > > > info from ONFI extended parameter page for parts using ONFI >= 2.1. In > > > > > > s/info/information/ > > > > > > > case of non-onfi NAND there could be a nand_id table entry with the ecc > > > > > > s/ecc/ECC/ > > > > > > > info. If there is a valid device tree entry for nand-ecc-strength and > > > > nand-ecc-step-size fields it still shall override the detected values. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Kamal Dasu <kdasu.kdev@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/brcmnand/brcmnand.c | 10 ++++++++++ > > > > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/brcmnand/brcmnand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/brcmnand/brcmnand.c > > > > index ce0b8ff..e967b30 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/brcmnand/brcmnand.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/brcmnand/brcmnand.c > > > > @@ -2144,6 +2144,16 @@ static int brcmnand_setup_dev(struct brcmnand_host *host) > > > > return -EINVAL; > > > > } > > > > > > > > + if (!(chip->ecc.size > 0 && chip->ecc.strength > 0) && > > > > > > Is the case where only size OR strength is valid handled? > > > > Both strength and need to be valid, else the driver will behave like > > before and will fail the probe. > > Yes, but you do not handle the case when either strength OR size is not > valid but the other one is. Is it one purpose? > If I understand you want me to use the following check: if (ecc->mode != NAND_ECC_NONE && (!ecc->size || !ecc->strength)) { if (chip->base.eccreq.step_size && chip->base.eccreq.strength) { /* use the base values */ } > > > > > > > > > + (chip->base.eccreq.strength > 0 && > > > > + chip->base.eccreq.step_size > 0)) { > > > > + /* use detected ecc parameters */ > > > > > > Use ECC > > > > > > > + chip->ecc.size = chip->base.eccreq.step_size; > > > > + chip->ecc.strength = chip->base.eccreq.strength; > > > > + pr_info("Using detected nand-ecc-step-size %d, nand-ecc-strength %d\n", > > > > + chip->ecc.size, chip->ecc.strength); > > > > + } > > > > + > > > > switch (chip->ecc.size) { > > > > case 512: > > > > if (chip->ecc.algo == NAND_ECC_HAMMING) > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Miquèl > > > > Kamal > > > > > Thanks, > Miquèl Kamal ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/