
On Wed, 2015-05-20 at 21:46 -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
On Wed, 2015-05-20 at 19:42 -0700, Andrei Yakimov wrote:
For now lets stick with 1536 in u-boot. I will send a patch. At least it will not loosing flash over time as nand ages.
I understand what you wish, and will take a look on it inside fresh new kernel. I found one more driver - marvel looks like have same problem. I will check how NAND_CMD_RNDOUT is working. Perhaps we do not need extra read_param(), and use only NAND_CMD_RNDOUT to get next block inside page loop.
Again, I'm a reluctant to use RNDOUT in the default read_param() because that would change the flow for all controllers and chips, and while the chip manual I'm looking at says it's OK, it introduces risk that it doesn't work everywhere (e.g. some controller drivers that provide their own cmdfunc don't implement RNDOUT).
Forget about read_param(), just like this: for (i = 0; i < 3; i++) { for (j = 0; j < sizeof(*p); j++) ((uint8_t *)p)[j] = chip->read_byte(mtd); if (onfi_crc16(ONFI_CRC_BASE, (uint8_t *)p, 254) == le16_to_cpu(p->crc)) { break; } chip->cmdfunc(mtd, NAND_CMD_RNDOUT, 0, -1); }
and this is good - will be "no op" or "bad command" error, which could be ignored - so for this drivers operation flow is unchanged.
-Scott
I am still learning git/patman. It will be day or two while I figure out patman. By some reason after "git commit --amend" patman kill my patch. I am missing something. Andrei