Hi Sascha, > > Subject: Re: No oob scheme defined for oobsize 224 on imx6ull board > > Hi, > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 05:11:11PM +0800, ֣С¾ü wrote: > > Hi, all > > I am trying to run barebox on my i.mx6ull board. I inherit from > > nxp-imx6ull-evk. When I added nand flash support, system crashed. I > > found that the pointer "chip->legacy.set_features" and > > "chip->legacy.get_features" in nand_mxs.c was NULL. > > I replaced it with nand_set_features() and nand_get_features(). > > This looks like the correct solution for this. Care to send a patch? > > > Barebox didn't crash again, but I get the errors: > > nand_base: device found, Manufacturer ID: 0x2c, Chip ID: 0xdc > > nand_base: Micron MT29F4G08ABAEAWP > > nand_base: 512 MiB, SLC, erase size: 256 KiB, page size: 4096, > > OOB size: 224 > > WARNING: at drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c:5591/nand_scan_tail()! > > WARNING: No oob scheme defined for oobsize 224 > > mxs_nand 1806000.nand-controller@xxxxxxxxxx: probe failed: > > Invalid argument > > You are falling into: > > /* > * If no default placement scheme is given, select an appropriate one. > */ > if (!mtd->ooblayout && > !(ecc->mode == NAND_ECC_SOFT && ecc->algo == NAND_ECC_BCH)) { > ... > } > > Normally mtd->ooblayout should be set at this point. the nand_mxs driver > currently misses to set it. I think you have to adopt > gpmi_ooblayout_ecc() and gpmi_ooblayout_free() from the Linux driver for > barebox. > > This bug seems to trigger for NANDs with bigger page sizes. I only > tested the last NAND layer update with smaller page sizes. So it's not > you who misses something, it's me who missed something ;) > I'm trying to port gpmi_ooblayout_ecc() and gpmi_ooblayout_free() from Linux, barebox can run and load linux, but I encountered another error, barebox can not write itself and kernel(linux) to nand device through barebox_update command. I traced the source and found that the bbu_std_file_handler() need unprotect device, but nand driver do not supply the unlock function, so nand_unlock() return -ENOTSUPP, and bbu_std_file_handler() failed. Linux driver just assign mtd->_unlock to NULL, but barebox assign it to nand_unlock(), I found nand_macronix.c supply ops.unlock_area function, so mtd->_unlock is needed. So I make the nand_unlock() return -ENOSYS, it it the right way? Although the gpmi_ooblayout_ecc() is worked, but the source included ugly debug codes, I'll send a patch after clean it. > Regards, > Sascha > > -- > Pengutronix e.K. | | > Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | > 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | > Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox