Hi Pekon, Thank you for your answers. Please find my answers/comments to your questions below.
2013/11/6 Gupta, Pekon <pe...@ti.com> > Hi Matti and Matthias > > Sorry I was away from my mailbox so couldn't reply you earlier. > I'm still away from my setup and other boards, so cannot replicate > the issue below until early next week. But I'll surely do so asap.. > > However, please see my replies below, which might help you someway. > > > > From: matti kaasinen [mailto:matti.kaasi...@gmail.com] > > Hi Pekon, > > Thanks to Tom Rini's hint I have tried to execute your patch sets > > (http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/list/?submitter=17320&state=* > ) > > in order to get Linux and U-Boot working with same NAND flash. > > Set-up is pretty much like Mathias has before in this chain. > > Latest problem I faced with is that last versions of > > 1) "[U-Boot,v8,3/5] mtd: nand: omap: optimize chip->ecc.calculate() > for H/W ECC schemes" > > and 2) "[U-Boot,v2,2/3] mtd: nand: omap: add support for BCH16_ECC - > NAND driver updates" > > are not compatible any more. As I told in > > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/beagleboard/7ofbE_Rrn_s > > versions v5..v7 of 1) could possibly be compatible. > > There is no change in ECC layout or other functional updates between > v7 and v8 of this patch, so if there is any incompatibility then it would > be in all versions of the patch.. > I did not mean "ECC layout-wisely" incompatible but "patching-wisely" incompatible. Patching 2) v2 after 1) v8 stops to errors and it seems that with 1) v7 it could (possibly) succeed. Few questions.. > (1) Which ECC scheme are you using ? > Now I'm talking Linux 3.8.13 - U-Boot 10.04 combination that I have as currently as "working" environment. I have not managed getting above patches successfully through. > - u-boot > CONFIG_NAND_OMAP_ECCSCHEME as per doc/README.nand > http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2013-October/164646.html > U-Boot 10.04 does not seem to have such choices and in fact I have not selected it. > - kernel > OMAP_ECC_BCH8_CODE_HW > OMAP_ECC_BCH8_CODE_HW_DETECTION_SW > Or any other.. > I believe OMAP_ECC_BCH8_CODE_HW gets selected with following options from kernel. CONFIG_MTD_NAND_OMAP2 CONFIG_MTD_NAND_OMAP_BCH CONFIG_MTD_NAND_OMAP_BCH8 ... and selecting following choice ti,nand-ecc-opt = "bch8" in device tree. With these options boot process reports; [ 1.128154] enabling NAND BCH ecc with 8-bit correction [ 1.133985] ONFI param page 0 valid [ 1.137662] ONFI flash detected [ 1.140985] NAND device: Manufacturer ID: 0x2c, Chip ID: 0xda (Micron MT29F2G08AAD), 256MiB, page size: 2048, OOB size: 64 First line seems coming from drivers/nand/mtd/omap2.c:omap3_init_bch that gets printed in this from only if OMAP_ECC_BCH8_CODE_HW == platform_data.ecc_opt I printed nand.ecc.layout.eccbytes = 52 ( from from drivers/nand/mtd/omap2.c:omap3_init_bch_tail ) and nand.ecc.layout->eccpos[] = 12..63 BTW it seems that similar layout has been defined in u-boot arch/arm/include/asm/arch-omap3/omap_gpmc.h There is one exception, though: eccbytes have been set 54 instead of 52 that seems to be in linux (and correct I suppose). > > > (2) Is the problem related to incorrect read/write access to x16 NAND ? > No using x8 NAND > Or > Is it incompatibility in ecc.layout ? > You can check this by dumping raw nand page via 'nand dump' command > from both u-boot and kernel. > > I'll try to check this > (3) you should not pick BCH16 patch-series > - because I have not rebased this patch, and re-tested since other > base patch-series on which BCH16 will be build, is still not accepted. > - Also BCH16 ecc scheme would work only for > NAND device with pagesize=4K and oobsize=224. > whereas current beaglebone capes have > NAND device with pagesize=2K and oobsize=64, so you can only use > BCH8 with current NAND capes (for now).. > This is perfectly fine with me. This set seems to block patching. I need only BCH8 and if this patch set provides only BCH16 functionality and nothing else, I need not using it. > > > > > > 2013/11/1 Matthias Fuchs <mfu...@ma-fu.de> > > > Hi Pekon, > > > > > > should I consider the U-Boot and Linux am335x NAND > > > implementation to be compatible? So are the ECC schemes > > > in a way identical that I can nandwrite a kernel image from > > > Linux and "nand read" it from U-Boot? I tested with the 3.8.13 > > > beaglebone kernel (which is of course not very representative) > > > and it does not work. If it should work, do you know it that was > > > already the case before your patches and with which Linux kernel? > > I don't think any earlier kernel versions ever supported beaglebone > Its only recently that a major patch-series of NAND driver was > accepted and tested on beaglebone. > The patches are currently in l2-mtd.git tree which should make into > 3.13 kernel, before being in linux-next for sometime. > (a) Reference: > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2013-October/049462.html > > (b) In addition to above series, you might need beaglebone DTS updates > which you can refer from below .. > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2013-October/049438.html > > So, you mean that it should not be possible to access beaglebone (alike) board NAND with Linux 3.8.13. However, it seems that I can access it from Linux (well, I have done some patching for IO and mux and device tree). Problem really is that U-Boot and Linux handle it in different ways so that if I create e.g. ubifs volume in Linux, that works quite fine. I can rean/write it quite fine. However, if I mount it from U-boot, it get tons of ecc error messages and as a result it gets corrupted. After that also Linux side prints tons of ecc error messages while acessing it. > > with regards, pekon Thanks, Matti
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
