Messages in this thread | | | From | Masahiro Yamada <> | Date | Tue, 21 Mar 2017 18:07:45 +0900 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] mtd: nand: use .read_oob() instead of .cmdfunc() for bad block check |
| |
Hi Boris,
2017-03-15 16:55 GMT+09:00 Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>: > On Wed, 15 Mar 2017 09:55:13 +0900 > Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> wrote: > >> Hi Boris, >> >> Thanks for your review. >> >> 2017-03-15 5:58 GMT+09:00 Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>: >> > On Wed, 15 Mar 2017 02:45:48 +0900 >> > Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> wrote: >> > >> >> The nand_default_block_markbad() is the default implementation of >> >> chip->block_markbad(). This is called for marking a block as bad. >> >> It invokes nand_do_write_oob(), then calls a higher level accessor >> >> ecc->write_oob(). >> >> >> >> On the other hand, when reading BBM from the OOB, chip->block_bad() >> >> is called, and nand_block_bad() is the default implementation. This >> >> function calls a lower level chip->cmdfunc(). If a driver wants to >> >> re-use nand_block_bad(), it is required to support NAND_CMD_READOOB >> >> in its cmdfunc().
I just noticed duplicated efforts for reading BBM.
When creating BBT at initialization, functions are called as follows:
check_create() create_bbt() scan_block_fast()
scan_block_fast() calls high-level API mtd_read_oob() to check BBM.
On the other hand, we have nand_block_bad() implemented with lower API.
Perhaps, we can merge them.
So, do you want to align to the scan_block_fast approach (high level API)?
-- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada
| |