Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] - fix "nand erase clean" problem

2008-10-28 Thread Scott Wood
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 11:45:21AM +0100, Ilko Iliev wrote: > > AFAICT, it does a read using MTD_OOB_AUTO, which can span multiple > > free segments. > Yes, but the current U-BOOT uses MTD_OOB_PLACE and the command "nand > erase clean" marks all blocks as bad. I'm not defending the current code.

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] - fix "nand erase clean" problem

2008-10-28 Thread Ilko Iliev
Dear Scott, Scott Wood wrote: > Ilko Iliev wrote: >>> Why must the cleanmarker fit in the first free segment? >>> >> The Linux NAND driver looks for the cleanmarkers at this place. > > AFAICT, it does a read using MTD_OOB_AUTO, which can span multiple > free segments. Yes, but the current U-BO

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] - fix "nand erase clean" problem

2008-10-27 Thread Scott Wood
Ilko Iliev wrote: >> Why must the cleanmarker fit in the first free segment? >> > The Linux NAND driver looks for the cleanmarkers at this place. AFAICT, it does a read using MTD_OOB_AUTO, which can span multiple free segments. >> What if oobsize > 64 (as with 4k pages)? Why write anything a

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] - fix "nand erase clean" problem

2008-10-27 Thread Ilko Iliev
Dear Scott, Scott Wood wrote: > On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 05:48:47PM +0100, Ilko Iliev wrote: > >> With this patch "nand erase clean" writes correctly the cleanmarkers. >> Without this patch "nand erase clean" fills the OOB with zeros which >> marks all blocks as bad. >> >> Signed-off-by: Ilko I

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] - fix "nand erase clean" problem

2008-10-27 Thread Scott Wood
On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 05:48:47PM +0100, Ilko Iliev wrote: > With this patch "nand erase clean" writes correctly the cleanmarkers. > Without this patch "nand erase clean" fills the OOB with zeros which > marks all blocks as bad. > > Signed-off-by: Ilko Iliev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > --- > drivers/