Hello Yegor, On 05/07/2022 17:46, Yegor Yefremov wrote: > Hi Roger, > > On Mon, Jul 4, 2022 at 12:31 PM Yegor Yefremov > <yegorslists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Hi Roger, >> >> On Mon, Jul 4, 2022 at 12:28 PM Roger Quadros <rogerq@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> Hello Yegor, >>> >>> On 04/07/2022 14:28, Yegor Yefremov wrote: >>>> Hi Roger, >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 1:22 PM Roger Quadros <rogerq@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Yegor, >>>>>llo >>>>> On 29/06/2022 17:23, Yegor Yefremov wrote: >>>>>> Hi Roger, >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 3:44 PM Roger Quadros <rogerq@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Yegor, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 29/06/2022 14:33, Roger Quadros wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi Yegor, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 28/06/2022 14:59, Yegor Yefremov wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 1:57 PM Yegor Yefremov >>>>>>>>> <yegorslists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Roger, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 1:44 PM Roger Quadros <rogerq@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Yegor, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 28/06/2022 13:48, Yegor Yefremov wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Since linux 5.17 I get the following issue when doing ubiformat: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> # ubiformat -y /dev/mtd5 >>>>>>>>>>>> ubiformat: mtd5 (nand), size 265945088 bytes (253.6 MiB), 2029 >>>>>>>>>>>> eraseblocks of 131072 bytes (128.0 KiB), min. I/O size 2048 bytes >>>>>>>>>>>> libscan: scanning eraseblock 1097 -- 54 % complete eth1 timed out to bring up >>>>>>>>>>>> libscan: scanning eraseblock 2028 -- 100 % complete >>>>>>>>>>>> ubiformat: 2001 eraseblocks have valid erase counter, mean value is 9 >>>>>>>>>>>> ubiformat: 2 eraseblocks are supposedly empty >>>>>>>>>>>> ubiformat: 26 bad eraseblocks found, numbers: 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, >>>>>>>>>>>> 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, >>>>>>>>>>>> 31, 32 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I'm guessing these bad blocks recently added due to the offending patch? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Yes. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> ubiformat: formatting eras[ 33.644323] nand: nand_erase_nand: >>>>>>>>>>>> attempt to erase a bad block at page 0x00000d40 >>>>>>>>>>>> ubiformat: formatting eraseblock 28[ 33.658809] nand: >>>>>>>>>>>> nand_erase_nand: attempt to erase a bad block at page 0x00000d80 >>>>>>>>>>>> ubiformat: formatting eraseblock 29 -- 1 % [ 33.674531] nand: >>>>>>>>>>>> nand_erase_nand: attempt to erase a bad block at page 0x00000dc0 >>>>>>>>>>>> ubiformat: formatting eraseblock 30 -- 1 % complete [ 33.684508] >>>>>>>>>>>> nand: nand_erase_nand: attempt to erase a bad block at page 0x00000e00 >>>>>>>>>>>> ubiformat: formatting eraseblock 34 -- 1 % complete libmtd: error!: >>>>>>>>>>>> MEMERASE64 ioctl failed for eraseblock 34 (mtd5) >>>>>>>>>>>> error 5 (Input/output error) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> ubiformat: error!: failed to erase eraseblock 34 >>>>>>>>>>>> error 5 (Input/output error) >>>>>>>>>>>> ubiformat: marking block 34 bad >>>>>>>>>>>> ubiformat: formatting eraseblock 35 -- 1 % complete libmtd: error!: >>>>>>>>>>>> MEMERASE64 ioctl failed for eraseblock 35 (mtd5) >>>>>>>>>>>> error 5 (Input/output error) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> ubiformat: error!: failed to erase eraseblock 35 >>>>>>>>>>>> error 5 (Input/output error) >>>>>>>>>>>> ubiformat: marking block 35 bad >>>>>>>>>>>> ubiformat: formatting eraseblock 36 -- 1 % complete libmtd: error!: >>>>>>>>>>>> MEMERASE64 ioctl failed for eraseblock 36 (mtd5) >>>>>>>>>>>> error 5 (Input/output error) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> ubiformat: error!: failed to erase eraseblock 36 >>>>>>>>>>>> error 5 (Input/output error) >>>>>>>>>>>> ubiformat: marking block 36 bad >>>>>>>>>>>> ubiformat: formatting eraseblock 37 -- 1 % complete libmtd: error!: >>>>>>>>>>>> MEMERASE64 ioctl failed for eraseblock 37 (mtd5) >>>>>>>>>>>> error 5 (Input/output error) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> ubiformat: error!: failed to erase eraseblock 37 >>>>>>>>>>>> error 5 (Input/output error) >>>>>>>>>>>> ubiformat: marking block 37 bad >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> ubiformat: error!: consecutive bad blocks exceed limit: 4, bad flash? >>>>>>>>>>>> # [ 36.322563] vwl1271: disabling >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> git bisect pointed to the following commit: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> a9e849efca4f9c7732ea4a81f13ec96208994b22 is the first bad commit >>>>>>>>>>>> commit a9e849efca4f9c7732ea4a81f13ec96208994b22 >>>>>>>>>>>> Author: Roger Quadros <rogerq@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>>>>>>>> Date: Thu Dec 9 11:04:55 2021 +0200 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> mtd: rawnand: omap2: move to exec_op interface >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Stop using legacy interface and move to the exec_op interface. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Roger Quadros <rogerq@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>>>>>>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mtd/20211209090458.24830-4-rogerq@xxxxxxxxxx >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> :040000 040000 2341051b8aa8e6b554b8a44d2934f76d1aa460c4 >>>>>>>>>>>> c1727080ff16c403f4ad5ed840acc90127b632f8 M drivers >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Info to my NAND flash: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> [ 5.695760] nand: device found, Manufacturer ID: 0x2c, Chip ID: 0xda >>>>>>>>>>>> [ 5.702193] nand: Micron MT29F2G08ABAEAWP >>>>>>>>>>>> [ 5.706356] nand: 256 MiB, SLC, erase size: 128 KiB, page size: >>>>>>>>>>>> 2048, OOB size: 64 >>>>>>>>>>>> [ 5.714204] nand: using OMAP_ECC_BCH8_CODE_HW ECC scheme >>>>>>>>>>>> [ 5.719673] 6 cmdlinepart partitions found on MTD device omap2-nand.0 >>>>>>>>>>>> [ 5.726232] Creating 6 MTD partitions on "omap2-nand.0": >>>>>>>>>>>> [ 5.731594] 0x000000000000-0x000000020000 : "SPL" >>>>>>>>>>>> [ 5.737788] mtdblock: MTD device 'SPL' is NAND, please consider >>>>>>>>>>>> using UBI block devices instead. >>>>>>>>>>>> [ 5.750113] 0x000000020000-0x000000040000 : "SPL.backup1" >>>>>>>>>>>> [ 5.756916] mtdblock: MTD device 'SPL.backup1' is NAND, please >>>>>>>>>>>> consider using UBI block devices instead. >>>>>>>>>>>> [ 5.769870] 0x000000040000-0x000000060000 : "SPL.backup2" >>>>>>>>>>>> [ 5.776695] mtdblock: MTD device 'SPL.backup2' is NAND, please >>>>>>>>>>>> consider using UBI block devices instead. >>>>>>>>>>>> [ 5.789559] 0x000000060000-0x000000080000 : "SPL.backup3" >>>>>>>>>>>> [ 5.796423] mtdblock: MTD device 'SPL.backup3' is NAND, please >>>>>>>>>>>> consider using UBI block devices instead. >>>>>>>>>>>> [ 5.809341] 0x000000080000-0x000000260000 : "u-boot" >>>>>>>>>>>> [ 5.816652] mtdblock: MTD device 'u-boot' is NAND, please consider >>>>>>>>>>>> using UBI block devices instead. >>>>>>>>>>>> [ 5.829189] 0x000000260000-0x000010000000 : "UBI" >>>>>>>>>>>> [ 5.971508] mtdblock: MTD device 'UBI' is NAND, please consider >>>>>>>>>>>> using UBI block devices instead. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> What platform are you on? >>>>>>>>>>> I do remember testing this on omap3-beagle but it does not use BCH8 ECC scheme. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I am on am335x [1] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch/arm/boot/dts/am335x-baltos-ir5221.dts?h=v5.19-rc4 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> NAND node definition [1]: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> &gpmc { >>>>>>>>> pinctrl-names = "default"; >>>>>>>>> pinctrl-0 = <&nandflash_pins_s0>; >>>>>>>>> ranges = <0 0 0x08000000 0x10000000>; /* CS0: NAND */ >>>>>>>>> status = "okay"; >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> nand@0,0 { >>>>>>>>> compatible = "ti,omap2-nand"; >>>>>>>>> reg = <0 0 4>; /* CS0, offset 0, IO size 4 */ >>>>>>>>> interrupt-parent = <&gpmc>; >>>>>>>>> interrupts = <0 IRQ_TYPE_NONE>, /* fifoevent */ >>>>>>>>> <1 IRQ_TYPE_NONE>; /* termcount */ >>>>>>>>> rb-gpios = <&gpmc 0 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; /* gpmc_wait0 */ >>>>>>>>> nand-bus-width = <8>; >>>>>>>>> ti,nand-ecc-opt = "bch8"; >>>>>>>>> ti,nand-xfer-type = "polled"; >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Could you please change this to "prefetch-polled" and see if it fixes the issue? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I tried to set ti,nand-xfer-type to "polled" on beagle-c4 board and could not reproduce the issue >>>>>>> I will need your help please to debug this issue. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Could you please apply the below patch on top of commit a9e849efca4f9c7732ea4a81f13ec96208994b22 >>>>>>> and send me the full kernel log and output of ubiformat command? >>>>>> >>>>>> I'll post the data later. >>>>>> >>>>>> The test with the "prefetch-polled" setting looks promising: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. ubiformat runs without issues >>>>>> 2. I can boot from NAND after "cat MLO > /dev/mtdblock0", etc. >>>>>> 3. the kernel can mount UBIFS as rootfs >>>>>> >>>>>> The only issue I have for now, is that barebox fails to correctly >>>>>> mount the first partition (the second with UBIFS rootfs - no problem). >>>>>> This is how I write to NAND: >>>>>> >>>>>> ubiformat -y /dev/mtd5 >>>>>> ubiattach -p /dev/mtd5 >>>>>> ubimkvol /dev/ubi0 -N kernel -s 56MiB >>>>>> mount -t ubifs ubi0:kernel /mnt >>>>>> cp kernel-fit.itb /mnt >>>>>> umount /mnt >>>>>> ubimkvol /dev/ubi0 -N rootfs -s 180MiB >>>>>> ubiupdatevol /dev/ubi0_1 rootfs.ubifs >>>>>> >>>>>> barebox log: >>>>>> >>>>>> Booting from NAND >>>>>> ubi0: scanning is finished >>>>>> ubi0: registering /dev/nand0.UBI.ubi >>>>>> ubi0: registering kernel as /dev/nand0.UBI.ubi.kernel >>>>>> ubi0: registering rootfs as /dev/nand0.UBI.ubi.rootfs >>>>>> ubi0: attached mtd0 (name "nand0.UBI", size 253 MiB) to ubi0 >>>>>> ubi0: PEB size: 131072 bytes (128 KiB), LEB size: 129024 bytes >>>>>> ubi0: min./max. I/O unit sizes: 2048/2048, sub-page size 512 >>>>>> ubi0: VID header offset: 512 (aligned 512), data offset: 2048 >>>>>> ubi0: good PEBs: 1999, bad PEBs: 30, corrupted PEBs: 0 >>>>> >>>>> Note that we now have 30 bad PEBs. I suppose these are not >>>>> really bad and we need to somehow clear bad block status for these. >>>> >>>> Do you mean using u-boot's "nand scrab"? So far, I didn't found any >>>> other option. There are numerous threads both mtd and barebox mailing >>>> lists but no implementation. >>>> >>>> Unfortunately, I don't have the initial BBT info. So let's hope the >>>> system can handle this. >>> >>> >>> "nand scrub" will mark all sectors not-bad so doesn't look like the best option. >>> I was wondering if there is a better way to selectively mark individual sectors not bad. >> >> Haven't found anything suitable so far. >> >>>> >>>> Btw, I have applied your debug patch and executed a ubiformat command >>>> but the debug messages weren't triggered. >>> >>> That is because you no longer see errors during nand erase. Did you try >>> going back to ti,nand-xfer-type = "polled" ? >> >> I have applied the patch to a9e849efca4f9c7732ea4a81f13ec96208994b22 >> and at that time our DTS still has xfer type as "polled" and ubiformat >> command failed as expected. > > I think the issue is solved. The bootloader was actually complaining > about the missing zstd support. I could see this with the latest > barebox version (2022.06). > > I've also switched to "ti,nand-xfer-type = "prefetch-dma";" as other DTS do. Just to conclude, 1) Barebox issue was barebox configuration related. 2) NAND erase issue was fixed by switching to "prefetch-dma" or "prefetch-polled" Does the issue still happen with "polled"? If yes it might be due to too less GPMC timing value for Read/Busy signalling. Can you please send a patch with the fix? Thanks! > > Thanks for your help. > > Yegor cheers, -roger
