Hi,
Am 09.06.2017 um 11:08 schrieb Sascha Hauer:
On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 10:17:55AM +0200, Daniel Schultz wrote:
Hi Sascha,
And can not work. Additionally eccsteps must be set to 1 in
omap_correct_bch(). This effectively makes the loop in this function
unnecessary which can then removed.
Which then means omap_gpmc_read_page_bch_rom_mode() has to iterate over
ecc.steps itself, just like the other read_page implementations in the
framework do.
So, the previous assignment of eccsteps was fine?
I just sent an updated patch(-series). Could you give it a try?
It works, but the current version only changes the local copy of the
pointer. As a result of that it will only check the first 512 Bytes.
I appended a double pointer workaround for this problem :)
omap_correct_data() also calls omap_correct_bch(). Does Barebox correct
NAND partitions? I have never seen this. Maybe we need here also a loop.
From 2b104598933b00cd33a85333ce72a49de7230507 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Daniel Schultz <d.schultz@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2017 15:15:30 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Add double pointer to current OMAP NAND ECC patch stack
Signed-off-by: Daniel Schultz <d.schultz@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/mtd/nand/nand_omap_gpmc.c | 24 ++++++++++++------------
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_omap_gpmc.c
b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_omap_gpmc.c
index 334014a..7608545 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_omap_gpmc.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_omap_gpmc.c
@@ -292,8 +292,8 @@ static int omap_calculate_ecc(struct mtd_info *mtd,
const uint8_t *dat,
return __omap_calculate_ecc(mtd, dat, ecc_code, 0);
}
-static int omap_correct_bch(struct mtd_info *mtd, uint8_t *dat,
- uint8_t *read_ecc, uint8_t *calc_ecc)
+static int omap_correct_bch(struct mtd_info *mtd, uint8_t **dat,
+ uint8_t **read_ecc, uint8_t **calc_ecc)
{
struct nand_chip *nand = (struct nand_chip *)(mtd->priv);
struct gpmc_nand_info *oinfo = (struct gpmc_nand_info *)(nand->priv);
@@ -328,14 +328,14 @@ static int omap_correct_bch(struct mtd_info *mtd,
uint8_t *dat,
/* check for any ecc error */
for (j = 0; (j < actual_eccsize) && (eccflag == 0); j++) {
- if (calc_ecc[j] != 0) {
+ if ((*calc_ecc)[j] != 0) {
eccflag = 1;
break;
}
}
if (eccflag == 1) {
- if (memcmp(calc_ecc, erased_ecc_vec, actual_eccsize) == 0) {
+ if (memcmp(*calc_ecc, erased_ecc_vec, actual_eccsize) == 0) {
/*
* calc_ecc[] matches pattern for ECC
* (all 0xff) so this is definitely
@@ -343,7 +343,7 @@ static int omap_correct_bch(struct mtd_info *mtd,
uint8_t *dat,
*/
} else {
bitflip_count = nand_check_erased_ecc_chunk(
- dat, oinfo->nand.ecc.size, read_ecc,
+ *dat, oinfo->nand.ecc.size, *read_ecc,
eccsize, NULL, 0, bch_max_err);
if (bitflip_count < 0)
is_error_reported = true;
@@ -352,22 +352,22 @@ static int omap_correct_bch(struct mtd_info *mtd,
uint8_t *dat,
if (is_error_reported) {
bitflip_count = omap_gpmc_decode_bch(1,
- calc_ecc, err_loc);
+ *calc_ecc, err_loc);
if (bitflip_count < 0)
return bitflip_count;
for (j = 0; j < bitflip_count; j++) {
if (err_loc[j] < 4096)
- dat[err_loc[j] >> 3] ^=
+ (*dat)[err_loc[j] >> 3] ^=
1 << (err_loc[j] & 7);
/* else, not interested to correct ecc */
}
}
totalcount += bitflip_count;
- calc_ecc = calc_ecc + actual_eccsize;
- read_ecc = read_ecc + eccsize;
- dat += 512;
+ *calc_ecc += actual_eccsize;
+ *read_ecc += eccsize;
+ *dat += 512;
return totalcount;
}
@@ -449,7 +449,7 @@ static int omap_correct_data(struct mtd_info *mtd,
uint8_t *dat,
* this time with oob data.
*/
__omap_calculate_ecc(mtd, dat, calc_ecc, 0);
- return omap_correct_bch(mtd, dat, read_ecc, calc_ecc);
+ return omap_correct_bch(mtd, &dat, &read_ecc, &calc_ecc);
default:
return -EINVAL;
}
@@ -705,7 +705,7 @@ static int omap_gpmc_read_page_bch_rom_mode(struct
mtd_info *mtd,
__omap_calculate_ecc(mtd, buf, ecc_calc, 1);
for (i = 0; eccsteps; eccsteps--, i += eccbytes, p += eccsize) {
- stat = omap_correct_bch(mtd, buf, ecc_code, ecc_calc);
+ stat = omap_correct_bch(mtd, &buf, &ecc_code, &ecc_calc);
if (stat < 0) {
mtd->ecc_stats.failed++;
} else {
--
1.9.1
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
